Smt. M.Srilatha v. The State Of Telangana

THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE P. NAVEEN RAO WRIT PETITION No.26381 OF 2019 Date:12.12.2019 Between:

Smt. M. Srilatha, W/o. M. Raghunath Reddy, Aged about 43 years, Occ: Household, R/o.H.No.8-8-12/1, 27/A, Road No.1, Green ParkColony, Karmanghat, Sroornagar, Hyderabad .. Petitioner And The State of Telangana, rep., by its Principal Secretary, (Revenue Department), Secretariat Building, Hyderabad and others .. Respondents The Court made the following:

THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE P. NAVEEN RAO WRIT PETITION No.26381 OF 2019 ORDER:

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Government Pleader for Revenue for respondents 1 to 4. 2.

Petitioner filed a representation on 08.04.2019 before the Tahsildar, Maheswaram Mandal, Ranga Reddy District, alleging that less extent of land is reflected in the revenue records than the land purchased by her along with her sister. She further alleges that she along with her sister purchased land to an extent of Acs.2.00 in Survey No.16 and Acs.3.35 guntas in Survey No.17 of Malkidanguda Village, Maheswaram Mandal, Ranga Reddy District. Earlier, pattadar passbooks and title deeds were issued reflecting the correct entries in the revenue records. However, in the new pattadar passbooks issued in favour of the petitioner, as against the share of Ac.1.38 guntas of land, divided between two sisters, only land to an extent of Ac.1.03 guntas is reflected in Survey No.17/A.

Therefore, petitioner submitted an application to rectify the revenue records. In response to the same, the Tahsildar passed orders dated 24.10.2019 informing the petitioner that there were excess sale transactions than the actual land available in Survey Nos.17/a, 17/e, 17/AA2 and 17/AA1 and in whose favour the excess land was sold cannot be ascertained by him and therefore refused to undertake the corrections in the revenue records.

3.

Admittedly, against the decision of the Tahsildar, remedy of appeal is available to the petitioner. If the petitioner is not

satisfied with the observations made by the Tahsildar, she can avail the remedy of appeal or avail civil law remedy. 4.

Therefore, the Writ Petition is dismissed leaving it open to the petitioner to avail the remedy of appeal against the decision of the Tahsildar or to work out her remedies in accordance with law. Pending Miscellaneous Petitions, if any, shall stand closed. ____________________ P. NAVEEN RAO, J Date:12.12.2019 KH