LawSphereX

Kenda Gangadhar and 3 Others v. The State of Telangana and 7 Others

Court: High Court for State of Telangana

Bench: SHAMEEM AKTHER

Judgment date:

Case summary

High Court for State of Telangana judgment dated 2020-12-21. Kenda Gangadhar and 3 Others v. The State of Telangana and 7 Others. Read the judgment and case...

Judgment text

HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA (Special Original Jurisdiction) IVONDAY, THE TWENTY FIRST DAY OF DECEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY PRESENT HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE SHAMEEM AKTHER WRIT PETITION No. 12045 OF 2020 Between: 1. Kenda Gangadhar, S/o. K. tVlallaiah, Aged about 36 years, Rl/o. H-No. 4-39/2/6, TLR Avenue, Macha Bollaram, Alwal, Secunderabad. 2. Darshanala Kista Swamy, S/o. Rajaiah, Aged about 40 years, Rl/o. Bavusaipet Village, Konaraopet Mandal, Raianna Siricilla District. 3. Ir,4. Gangadhar, S/o. Ganga Rajaram, Aged 37 years, Ri/o. Bavusaipet Village' Konaraopet lvlandal, Raianna Siricilla District. 4. D. Kumar, S/o. Ir,4eenaiah, Aged about 37 years, R/o. Bavusaipet Village, Konaraopet lVlandal, Rajanna Siricilla District. (Petitioner Nos. 2 to 4 rep. by their GPA Holder, Kenda Gangadhar i. e , Petitioner No. 1 herein ) ... PETITIONERS AND 1 The State of Telangana, Revenue Department, Rep. by its Principal Secretary, Secretariat, Hyderabad. District.

2 The Joint Collector, lr/edchal Malkajgiri, Ir/edchal Malkajgiri Malkajgiri 3 The Revenue Divisional Officer, t\/edchal tt/alkajgiri Division, Medchal District. District. 4 The Thasildar, Shamirpet t\/andal, Medchal Malkajgiri Aged about 40 years' Smt. G. Vijaya Laxmi, D/o. Late R. Venkateswara Rao, 5 R/o. Plot No. 16, Saraswathinagar, Lothukunta, Alwal, Secunderabad' Rao, Aged about 80 years, o Ramaraiu Sudershan, S/o. Late Laxmi Narsimha . Malkajgiri R/o. H. No. 1-7, Bommarasipet Mandal, Shamirpet Mandal, Medchal District. 39 years, Fi/o' H No T- 1-95, One 7 G. Krishna lr,4ohan, S/o. Narsaiah, Aged about Gadda, Ivlallial Village and Mandal, Jagitial District. G. Venkata tvladhava Krishna Rao, S/o. SudershanRao, aged about 46 years' 8 R/o. Chilvakodur Village, Gollapalli Mandal, Jagtlal Dtstrict' (ies[ondent No. 8 is riot necessary party to this Writ Petition)' ...

RESPONDENTS Petition under Article 226 of the constitution of tndia praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased to issue order or direction more particularly one in the nature of writ of [\,4andamus to declare the action of the Respondent No. 4, in incorporating the name of the iespondent No. 5 in the Revenue records, by deleting the names of the. Petittoners, without issuing any notice to the petitioners, without giving an opportunity of being heard, vide Fie No. 8/2276 12019, dated: 15t212020, as arbitrary, illegal, in flagrant violation of principles of natural justice, without jurisdiction, contrary to the settled set aside the order passed by the Respondent principles ol law and "on. "qu"nily No. 4, vide File No.

8/227612019, dated: 151212020' Contd lA NO: 1 oF 2020 Petition under Section 1si cpc praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High court may be pleased to suspend the order passed by the respondent No. 4 vide File No. Bl2276t2o1g, dt. 1slo2l2o2o pending disposal of the above writ petition. lA NO: 2 OF 2020 Betwee n : Vijaya,Laxmi, D/o. Late R. Venkateswara lTt _q Rao, Aqed about 40 vears. "' R/o. Plot No. '16, Saraswathinagar, Lothukunta, ntwat, '-" SeiunOeraOaO. petitioner/ ... 5rh Respondent AND 1 S/9, K tVlailaiah, Aged about lqlOl 36 years, R/o. H-No. ^Cglgadhar, 4-391216, TLR Avenue, Macha Bollaram, Alwal, Secundera6ad. 2. Darshanala Kista Swamy, S/o. Rajaiah, Aqed about 40 vears "' Rio. Bavusaipet Village, Kon-araopet L4andat, Ratann"j biri. iiij fjirtroi. '"" 3. M. Gangadhar, S/o. Ganga R"lqrgn, Aged 37 years, R/o. Bavusaipet Viilage, Konaraopet [\/andal, Rajanna S i ricil la District. 4. D. Kumar, S/o.

Meenaiah, Aged about 37 years, R/o. Bavusaipet Village, Konaraopet lVlandal, Rajanna Siricilla District. ' (Petitioner Nos. 2 to 4 rep. by their GpA Holder, Kenda Gangadhar i. e. , petitioner No. 'l herein) ... Respondents/Writ petitioners 5 Revenue Department, Rep. by its principat It-^. 5^131"^91--T:lllo,u. nq, secretary, Secretarlat, Hyderabad. 6. The Joint Collector, Medchal tValkajgiri, Medchal Matkajgiri District. 7. The Revenue Divisionar officer, Medchar IMarkajgiri Division, Ir/edchar Malkajgiri District. B. The Thasildar, Shamirpet Mandal, Medchal Malkajgiri District. 9. Ramaraju Sudershan, S/o. Late Laxmi Narsimha Rao. Aoed about B0 vears R/o. H. No. 1-7, Bommarasipet A,ilandal, Shamirpet H. lanOaI VeOinr] frrfrfiiftiri District. 10. G. Knshna l\,4ohan, S/o. Narsata. h, Aged about 39 years, R/o. H. No. 7_195, Orre Gadda, l,/allial Village and Manda'i, Jagitial Distri'ct. '1 1 . G. Venkata lt/adhava Krishna Rao, S/o. Sudershan Rao, aged about 'La"gii-f - 46 years, R/o.

Chitvakodur Viilage, Goilapaili tr/andat, b-iiiriii (Respondent No. 8 is not necessaI party petition). to this Writ ... RESPONDENTS Petition under Seclion '151 cpc praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in supporl of the petition, the High court may be pleased to vacate the interim orders passed in l. A No. 1 of 2o2o in w. p. No. 1204s of 2020 dated 0510812020 and dismiss the petition. Writ lA NO: 3 OF 2020 Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in supporl of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to permit the ,12045 petitioner to file the material papers as Additional l\,4aterial Papers in WP. No. ol 2020 by receiving the same. Counsel for the Petitioners: SRI GADOAM SRINIVAS Counsel for the Respondent Nos. 1 to 4: AGP FOR REVENUE Counsel for the Respondent No. 5: SRI A. JAGAN Counsel for the Respondent No. 6: SRI C. KUMAR Counsel for the Respondent Nos.

7&8:--- The Court made the following: ORDER THE HON'BLE DT. JUSTICE SHAMEEM AKTHER WRIT PETITION No. 12045 of 2O2O ORDER This Writ Petition, under Article 226 of the Constitutlon of India is filed by the petitioners, wherein, the following prayer is made: ". ,. to issue any writ or order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus to declare the action of the respondent No. 4 incorporating the name of the respondent No,5 in the revenue records by deleting the names of the petitioners without issuing any notice to the petitioners, without giving an opportunity of being heard vide File No. B/2276/2OL9, dated L5/02/2O2O as arbitrary, illegal, in flagrant violation of principles of natural justice without jurisdiction, contrary to the settled principles of law and consequently set aside the order passed by the respondent No. 4 vide File No. B/2276/2Ot9, dated L5/2/2O2O and pass orders.... " 2.

Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue appearing for the respondent Nos. 1 to 4, learned counsel for the respondent Nos. 5 to 7 and perused the record. 3. It brought to the notice of this Court that respondent No. B is not a necessary party to this writ petition. 4. Both the learned counsel for the petitioners as well as the learned counsel for the unofficial respondents conceded that there is an order in Writ Petition No. 12455 of 2004 dated 11. 07. 2005. The operative portion of the said order reads as under: "In the result, the writ petition is allowed setting aside the order of the Joint Collector dated 79. O6,2OO4, and the matter is remitted back to the Joint Collector for fresh ( hearing. The Joint Collector shall dispose of the appeal { uninfluenced by any of the observatioFs made in the writ petition.

" Intermsoftheaboveorder,thepartiesWeredirectedto appropriate concerned and sought the loint Collector approach the the respondent No 5 herein approached orders. However, permission to incorporate and sought respondent No. 4-Tahsildar No'4-and the respondent the revenue records her name in vide Flle order dated 15'02'2020 passed the impugned Tahsildar No. B/227612019. 5. Itispertinenttostatethattheimpugnedorderdated is contrary passed by the respondent No'4-Tahsildar 15. 02. 2020 totheorderdated11. 07. 2005passedinW. P. No. l2455of2004. the loint No'5 ought to have aPProached The resPondent order in the aforementioned as directed Ccllector concerned, datedll. 0T. 2o05. sincetheimpugnedorderdatedl5'02. 2020 No'4-respondent by the passed in File No'Bl227612Ol9 passed in 11 07'2005 order dated in of Tahsildar, is not terms and liable to of 2004, the same is unsustainable W. P. No.

12455 t5'02'2020 the impugned order dated be set aside, Accordingly, No'4-bY the resPondent passed in File No'P. 12276/2019 parties to work out to the aside' It is left open Tahsildar, is set the remedies available under law' this Writ Petition is disposed With the above observations' 6 no order as to costs' of. There shall be shall stand closed. etitions, if anY, Pending Miscellaneous P ^rr,'.? iFr'AJXt'+'il'' ! COPY// //TRUE OFFICER SECTION \ To, State of Telangana ' Department' Revenue 1 The Principal Secretary' HYderaoao Secretariat, District' Malkaigiri Medchal Malkajgiri' Medchal Collector' 2. The Joint Medchal Division' Ir/alkajgiri ottl*'' fU"Otftal Divisional I The Revenue District Malkaigiri 4. The Thasildar, Shamirpet tvlandal, Medchal tvlalkajgiri District. 5. One CC to Sri. Gaddam Srinivas, Advocate [OPUC] 6. One C. C. to Sri. A. Jagan, Advocate IOPUC] 7. One C. C. to Sri. C. Kumar, Advocate [OPUC] 8. Two CCs to GP for Revenue, High Court for the State of Telangana.

[OUT] 9. Two C. D. Copies Prk d HIGH COURT DATED:2111212020 1 l{ e IA ( i05 (, JAt'|2021 * * L ORDER WP. No. 12045 of 2020 Disposing of the WP. without costs. e o

Source: High Court for State of Telangana. Dataset: Dattam Labs. CC BY 4.0. Text extracted automatically; compare with the source PDF for layout and accuracy.