Raveesh Realty Infra Developers v. The State of Telangana
Court: High Court for State of Telangana
Bench: B.VIJAYSEN REDDY
Judgment date:
Case summary
High Court for State of Telangana judgment dated 2026-04-15. Raveesh Realty Infra Developers v. The State of Telangana. Read the judgment and case details...
Judgment text
[ 31831 IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) WEDNESDAY, THE FIFTEENTH DAY OF APRIL TWO THOUSAND AND TWENry SIX NT THE HONOURABLE SRl JUSTICE B. VIJAYSEN REDDY WRIT PETITION NO: 11485 OF 2026 Between: Raveesh Realty lnfra Developers, LLP at H. No. 1-98-9-12lNA Flat no. 205 Jubilee Cyber Grand Madhapur, Serilingampally, Ranga Reddy District rep. by its designated Partner Ponguleti Sai Charan Reddy S/o P. Mahendar Reddy Aged 31 years. PETITIONER AND 1. The State of Telangana, Rep. by Principal Secretary, Revenue Department, Secretariat, Hyderabad. 2. The District Collector, Ranga Reddy District Office at Kongara kalan, R. R. District. 3. The Revenue Divisional Officer, Shadnagar, Ranga Reddy District. 4. The Tahasildar, Kondurg Mandal, Ranga Reddy District. 5. Mohammed Shakeer, S/o Sadak, Aged about 45 years, Occ : Agriculture, Rl/o H. No. 2-39, Tekulapalle(v), Kondurg (M), Ranga Reddy District. .
RESPONDENTS Petition Under Article 226 of the Constitution of India 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 the nature of Writ of Mandamus, declaring the action of the respondent no. 4 in trying to proceed for affecting modification and mutation in favour of respondent no. s pursuant to his online application in Bhu Bharathi portal vide no. RC. 2600001915 dt. 23-2-2026 seeking to incorporate his name to an extent of Ac. 0-20 in Sy. no. 37lA2 situated at Tekulapalle (v) Kondurg (M) Ranga Reddy District, by deleting name of the petitioner, despite reply d1. 17-3-2O2A without conducting any physical enquiry, as illegal, arbitranl and violative of principles of natural justice and consequently direct the respondent: no. 4 to reject the application of the unbfficial respondent for affecting modification or mutation. I. A.
NO:1 OF 2026 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 respondent no. 4 not to modify or mutate the name of the unofficial respondent in place of petitioner in respect of land to an extent of Ac. O-20 in Sy. n o. 37lA2 situated at Tekulapalle (v) Kondurg (M) Ranga Reddy District, pending disposal of the above writ petition in the interest of justice. Counsel for the Petitioner : SRI M. V. HANUMANTHA Counsel for the Respondent Nos. 1 to 4 : P FOR REVENUE Counsel for the Respondent No. 5 : - The Court made the following ORDER IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE B. VIIAYSEN REDDY WRIT PETITION No. 11485 OF 2026 DATE OF ORDER: 15. 04.
2026 Between: Raveesh Realty Infra Developers Petitioner AND The State of Telangana Represented by its Principal Secretary, Revenue Department, Secretariat, Hyderabad and others Respondents ORDER: (oRAL) Heard Mr. M. V. Hanumantha Rao, learned counsel for the petitioner; Mr. L. Ravinder, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue, appearing for respondents No. l to 4; and perused the material on record. 2. Learned Assistant Goverrunent Pleader for Revenue takes preliminary objection to the maintainability of this writ petition and submitted that application has been filed by respondent No. 5 before respondent No. 3 seeking implementation of decree dated 10. 12. 2010 passed by the learned Senior Civil Judge at Shadnagar, Ranga Reddy District in O. S. No. 62 of 2008. The claim of the petitioner is that it has purchased the land admeasuring Acs. 37-00 guntas in Survey Nos.
37, 38, 39 and 40, situated at Tekulapalle Village, Kondurg Mandal, Ranga Reddy District out of the total suit land admeasuring Acs. 53-32 guntas from the plaintiffs and defendants. Thereafter, the petitioner applied for mutation in respect of the subject land which has been issued and subsequently, the patta'jar pass book was also issued its favour. Learned Assistant Government Pleader further submitted that the petitioner has submitted repry dated 17. 03-20'. 16 to the notice (Ex. p-l), and the same will be duly considered in accordanr:e with law. 3' Le'rned counsel for the petitioner submitted that there is no dispute with regard to the purchase of the subject land by the petitioner. Respondent No. 5 applied for pattadar pass book in respect of the land admeasuring Ac. 0-20 guntas in survey No-37/A2, situated at Tekulapalre village, Kondurg Mandal, Ranga Reddy District which forms part of the land admeasuring Acs. 37-00 guntas in survey N. s.
37, 38, 39 and 40 purchased by the petitioner. The mother of respondent No'5 (the wife of plaintiff No. 3 in the suit) executed sale deed in favour of the petitioner along with other parties in the suit. That after the death of her husband, respondent No-5 was brought on record as legal heir in the suit and does ntlt have any interest whatsoever over the land admeasuring Ac. 0-20 guntas in Survey No. 32lA2 purchased by the petitioner. 4' Thus' according to the learned counsel for the petitioner, the mutation application submitted by respondent No. 5 cannot be entertained in respect of the land admeasuring Ac. 0-20 guntas in Survey No. 32lA2 for which the petitioner was already 1;ranted mutation and pattadar pass book in its favour. J 5. tn the light of the above submissions, considering that the petitioner has already submitted reply to the notice, this Court is not inclined to express any opinion on merits.
The writ petition is disposed of directing respondent No'3 to consider the reply dated 17. 03. 2026to the notice (Ex. P-l), and pass appropriate orders in the mutation application No. RC2600001915 dated 23'02'2026 submitted by respondent No. 5 in accordance with law, by giving opportunity of hearing to the petitioner and respondent No'5, and all other concerned/interested persons. tt is made clear respondent No. 3 shall not pass any orders until the petitioner is heard. There shall be no order as to costs. applications, if any, pending in the writ As a sequel thereto, miscellaneous petition, stand closed. ANI SD,. K. BHAV ASSISTANT COPY ,,TRUE OFFIGER SEGTION of State To 1. 2. 3. 4. \ 5. 6 7 SA BN 8r$ n \ I cc-. rodot HIGH COURT DATED: 1510412026 THE S t (J 2 0 liPR ? frli * . *- ORDER WP. No. 11485 of 2026 D ISPOSING OF THE W. P o UT COSTS. t q,*t #
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.