Goli Nagamani v. The State Of Telangana
This judgment came from a scanned document and its text layer is unreliable — words may be garbled. Check the original PDF before relying on any passage.
[ 32961 HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD (Special Original J urisdiction) TUESDAY, THE THIRW FIRST DAY OF DECEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENW FOUR PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRIJUSTICE C.V. BHASKAR REDDY WRIT PETITION NO: 36817 OF 2024 Between:
Goli Nagamani, Wo Late Srinivasulu, Aged 45 years, Occ;. Cultivation, Rl/o Veldevi Village, Addaguduru Mandal, Yadadri Bhuvanagiri District. .....PETITIONER AND
1. The State of Telangana, Rep by its Principal Secretary, Department of Revenue Secretariat, Hyderabad.
2. The Court of Special Tribunal, District Collector/ Member Yadadri Bhuvanagiri District.
3. The Revenue Divisional Officer, Bhongir, Yadadri Bhuvanagiri District.
4. The Tahsildhar, Addaguduru Mandal, Yadadri Bhuvanagiri District.
5. Maroju Yadgiri, S/o Seethaiah, Aged. 55 Yeats, Occ. Cultivation, Ri./o Veldevi Village, Addaguduru Mandal, Yadadri Bhuvanagiri District. .....RESPONDENTS Petition Under Article 226 ol the Constitution of lndia praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased to issue a Writ, order or direction more particularly one in nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the Orders dt.O2.02.2021 passed in Special Tribunal Case no.F2l1 86412021 on the file of The Court Of Special Tribunal. Yadadri Bhuvanagiri District there by confirming the Mutation Proceedings passed through Amendment No.2912007-08 issued by the Tahsildhar, Addagudur Mandal, Yadadri Bhuvanagiri District, there by showing Sth Respondent as Possessor in Revenue Records with respect to Petitioners Agriculture Land admeasuring an extent of Ac 2-01 Guntas in Survey Number 330-e of Veldevi
Village, Addaguduru Mandal, Yadadri Bhuvanagiri District as arbitrary, contrary to provisions of The Telangana Rights in Land and Pattadhar Pass Books Act 1971 and set aside the same and consequently direct the Respondents 2 to 4 to carry out Rectifications in Revenue Records there by deleting the name of Sth Respondent from possessor column of lB Account, Adangal, further insert Petitioner's name as exclusive possessor with respect to Petitioner's Agriculture Land admeasuring an extent of Ac 2-0'l Guntas in Survey Number 330-e of Veldevi Village, Addaguduru Mandal, Yadadri Bhuvanagiri District as arbitrary. LA.NO:I OF 2024 Petition Under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to direct the Respbndent No.4 to not to carry out further mutations in Revenue Records with respect to Petitioner's Agriculture Land admeasuring an extent of Ac 2-O1 Guntas in Survey Number 330-e of Veldevi Village, Addaguduru Mandal, Yadadri Bhuvanagiri District as arbitrary.
Counsel for the Petitioner : SRI MALLESWARA RAO KALLU Counsel for the Respondent Nos.1 to 4 : AGP FOR REVENUE Counsel for the Respondent No.5 : - The Court made the following ORDER
HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V. BHASKAR REDDY \IIRIT PETITION No.36817 of 2o24 ORDER:
It is stated that the petitioner has filed an appeal under Section 5 (5) of the Telangana Rights in Land and Pattadar Passbooks Act, 1971 (for short "the ROR Act, 1971") questioning the mutation proceedings in respect of the agriculture land adrneasuring Acs.2.O1 guntas in Sy.No.33O-e of Veldevi Village, Addaguduru Maldal, Yadadri-Bhongir District, in favour of respondent No.S. Vide proceedings dated O7.O2.2O21 in Special Tribunal Case No.F2/ 1864 l2U2l, respondent No.2, duly taking into consideration of the revenue records and also the entries made therein, dismissed the appeal hled by the petitioner on the ground that the said appeal has been hled after a long lapse of time i.e., l0 years from the date of amendment being carried in the revenue records. Challenging the same, the present writ petition is liled. 2.
Considered the submissions of the learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri L.Ravinder, learned Assistant Government Pleader appearing for respondent Nos.1 to 4 and with their consent, this writ petition is disposed of at the admission stage. In ) view of the relief sought in this writ petition, issuance of notice to t, the unofficial respondent is dispensed with.
I T
CVBR, J Wp_36817 2024 3.
As seen from the record, the petitioner fited appeal after a lapse of 10 years from the date of mutation of the subject property in the name of respondent No.s and on the sole ground of delay, the said appeal was dismissed. This writ petition is aiso fiIed questioning the proceedings of the appellate authority nearly three years after passing of that order. Therefore, prima facie, it appears that both at the stage of appeal and fi1ing of the writ petition, there is inordinate delay on the part of the petitioner questioning the amendment/corrections carried out in the revenue records. Since, the petitioner is not diligent in hling the appeal before the appetlate authority as well as frling the writ petition questioning the orders of the appellate authority, this Court is of the opinion that the writ petition is misconceived and the same is liable to be dismissed on the ground of delay and latches. 4.
Accordingly, this Writ Petition is dismissed. There shall be no order as to costs.
5.
As a sequel, the miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shall stand closed.
SD/.L. LAKSHMI BABU ASSISTANT REGISTRAR //TRUE COPY// V To SECTION OFFICER Two CCs to GP FOR REVENUE, High Court for the State of Telangana at Hyderabad. [OUTI One CC to SRI MALLESWARA RAO KALLU, Advocate IOPUC] Two CD Copies SA BS^w'
HIGH COURT DATED:3111212024 ,F'
\\ 1 e SI*rrr,t v t
ORDER
11 tflli, ?[?5 J'
WP.No.36817 ot 2024 Q=f)'
,, DISMISSING THE W.P WITHOUT COSTS.
a\ a