V.Krupakar v. The State Of Telangana And 4 Others

HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE P.NAVEEN RAO Between:

V.Krupakar, s/o. late V.V.Thirupathaiah, Aged about 56 years, occu: GENCO employee, r/o. H.No.10-3-593/B, Vijay Nagar colony, Hyderabad.

.....Petitioner and The State of Telangana, rep.by its Prl.Secretary, Revenue Department, Secretariat Buildings, Hyderabad and others.

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

HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE P.NAVEEN RAO ORDER:

Petitioner claims that he purchased the land to an extent of 266.66 square yards in Sy.Nos.342/A, 343, and 344 of Attapur village, Rajendranagar mandal, Ranga Reddy district, by way of registered sale deed dated 03.12.2001 and thereafter he is in possession and enjoyment of the said property. In spite of several requests made to reflect his name in the revenue records, the revenue authorities are not taking steps. While so, he came to know about the notification issued by the Government vide G.O.Ms.No.1107 Revenue (Registration.I) Department, dated 06.06.2005 imposing prohibition on certain properties mentioned therein, including the survey number in which petitioner's land is also situated. Petitioner is aggrieved by non-deletion of his property from the prohibited list.

2.

Petitioner earlier filed W.P.No.8176 of 2019 seeking identical relief as sought in the present Writ Petition. Said Writ Petition was disposed of, by order dated 22.04.2019, granting liberty to the petitioner to workout his remedies requesting the Government to delete his name from the list of prohibited properties. Petitioner claimed to have made representation on 16.05.2019. Alleging inaction in disposing of the representation, petitioner filed W.P.No.15285 of 2019. Said Writ Petition was also disposed of, by order dated 26.09.2019, directing the 2nd respondent therein to dispose of the representation within a period of six weeks. Petitioner now alleges that in spite of said direction, so far representations are not disposed of.

3.

Having regard to the earlier orders of this Court, writ petitioner cannot be permitted to file successive Writ Petitions on the same issue. Therefore, Writ Petition is dismissed, leaving it open to petitioner to work out his remedies as available in law against inaction in considering his request for deleting his property from the list of prohibited properties. Pending miscellaneous petitions shall stand closed.

___________________________ JUSTICE P.NAVEEN RAO kkm

HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE P.NAVEEN RAO kkm