Vemula Chenchu Rama Rao v. The State Of Telangana And 3 Others

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE P.NAVEEN RAO WRIT PETITION NO.27261 OF 2019 Date: 10.12.2019 Between:

Vemula Chenchu Rama Rao S/o.Ramanaidu, 64 yrs, R/o.H.No.7-7/4, Gudipadu Road, Sathupalli Town, Khammam District.

.....Petitioner And The State of Telangana, Rep., by its Principal Secretary, Revenue Department, Secretariat, Saifabad, Hyderabad & others.

.....Respondents The Court made the following:

- 2 - THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE P.NAVEEN RAO WRIT PETITION NO.27261 OF 2019 ORDER:

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

Petitioner claims that he is the owner and in possession of Ac.1-00 guntas of land in Sy.No.100/A/1, having purchased the same through registered sale deed No.1584/1996. Petitioner also claims that he purchased Ac.4-24 guntas of land in the very same survey number and Ac.0-16 guntas in Sy.No.100/A/2 of Adavimallela Village, Penuballi Mandal, Khammam District, having purchased the same, by way of registered sale deed No.892/2007. In other words, petitioner is claiming to own Ac.6-00 guntas of land in Sy.No.100 with sub-divisions. Petitioner now alleges that the total extent of land in Sy.No.100 is Ac.6-00 guntas, whereas, the names of six other persons mentioned in paragraph No.6 of the affidavit filed in support of writ petition, with separate extents are recorded, without recording the name of petitioner. He further alleges that the said six persons are no way concerned with the land. They do not have any land in Sy.No.100. Therefore, inclusion of their names is illegal.

3.

Petitioner made a representation to the Joint Collector, Khammam on 03.06.2019 alleging that the Tahsildar erroneously reflected the names of some other six persons and requested to take action. The Collector, Khammam forwarded the said representation to the Revenue Divisional Officer, Kalluru, vide his letter dated 08.07.2019. Alleging inaction, this writ petition is filed.

- 3 - 3.

In substance the grievance of the petitioner is that though he validly purchased Ac.6-00 guntas of land in Sy.No.100 with subdivisions, his name was not entered in the revenue records and erroneously some other names, who are no way concerned with the land are shown in the revenue records. If that is so, petitioner has to avail the remedy of Appeal or Revision, but not a representation and forwarding of representation by the Collector to the Revenue Divisional Officer is also not valid in law. Therefore, no direction as sought for by the petitioner can be granted. 4.

Thus, leaving it open to the petitioner to work out his remedies as available in law, to establish his right over the property, the Writ Petition is dismissed. Pending miscellaneous petitions, if any, shall stand closed.

___________________ P.NAVEEN RAO, J 10th December, 2019 Rds