← Library
High Court for State of TelanganaWP/27186/2019dismissed no costs

Avula Kanakaiah v. State Of Telangana And 3 Others

2019-12-09P Naveen Rao4 pages

Date : 9.12.2019 Between:

Avula Kanakaiah S/o Late Veeraiah Hindu aged about 73 years Occ Agriculture Presently residing at R/o H No 7-1-258 behind C P I Office Manuguru Post and Mandal Bhadradri Kothagudem District Petitioner And State of Telangana and 3 others rep by its Principal Secretary Revenue Department Secretariat Hyderabad Respondents The Court made the following:

ORAL ORDER:

Heard learned counsel for petitioner and learned Government Pleader for Revenue.

2.

Petitioner claims that he is owner and in possession of land to an extent of Ac.1.15 guntas in survey No. 537/B, Kothakonda Dharmaram village, Bheemadevarapally mandal, Warangal urban district, having purchased the same through simple sale deed from Pilli Lingamma on 16.4.1958. According to petitioner, name of his father was incorporated in the revenue records from 1968-69 onwards. Petitioner asserts that his father was in possession and was cultivating the land till his death and thereafter he succeeded and has been cultivating the land. Petitioner was earlier issued pattadar pass books. Alleging that digital pattadar pass books are not issued to him, he earlier filed W P No. 10886 of 2019. The said writ petition was disposed of directing respondents to take appropriate action upon the representation of the petitioner dated 15.2.

2019 keeping in mind the fact that the petitioner was already issued a regular pattadar pass book, which is still in operation. In pursuant thereof, by the order impugned, request of the petitioner to issue pass book is rejected on the ground that name of the petitioner is not reflected in the revenue records. 3.

Learned counsel for petitioner did not dispute the fact that as on today, name of petitioner is not reflected in the revenue records. That being so, prima facie, I do not see any illegality in the impugned order warranting interference by this Court. Accordingly, writ petition is

dismissed, leaving it open to petitioner to workout remedies available to him in law. Miscellaneous petitions, if any pending, are closed. __________________ P NAVEEN RAO,J DATE: 09-12-2019 TVK

Date : 9.12.2019