Research › Search › Judgment

Telangana High Court · body

2020 DIGILAW 692 (TS)

Yennemala Swaruparani v. State Of Telangana

2020-09-10

SHAMEEM AKTHER

body2020
JUDGMENT Shameem Akther, J. - This Writ Petition, under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, is filed by the petitioner, wherein, the following prayer is made. "To issue an appropriate Writ, Order or Direction, more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus, declaring the action of the Respondent No.3 & 4 in not mutating the petitioner name in revenue records after death of petitioner mother-in-law by considering and disposing of the Representation, dated 07.08.2020 filed by petitioner for agriculture land admeasuring Ac.7.92 1/2 cents in Sy.No.9/3 and 9/4 situated at Chinganagaram (2), Venkatapuram Village, Mulugu Mandal, Khammam District and consequently direct the respondents to mutate the agriculture land of the petitioner admeasuring Ac.7.92 1/2 cents in Sy.No.9/3 and 9/4 situated at Chiganagaram (2), Venkatapuram Village, Mulugu Mandal, Khammam District and pass such other order or orders..." 2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner, the learned Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue appearing for the respondents and perused the record. 3. The learned counsel for the petitioner would contend that the petitioner is the owner and possessor of agricultural land admeasuring Acs.7.92 1/2 cents in Survey Nos.9/3 and 9/4 situated at Chinganagaram (2), Venkatapuram Village, Mulugu Mandal, Khammam District. He submitted an application, dated 07.08.2020, to the respondents, after completing all requirements including submission of application in Form 6-A through MEESEVA, for mutation of the subject land in his name, but however, no action has been taken by the respondents. 4. The learned Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue would submit that the subject land is Government land. Furthermore, the petitioner is a non-tribal and the subject land is situated in tribal area. Therefore, the petitioner is not entitled for the relief sought in this writ petition. 5. In reply, the learned counsel for the petitioner would contend that the subject land is a patta land and the petitioner has got sufficient documents as well as a judgment of the competent civil Court to substantiate the same. 6. The question of nature of land cannot be gone into by this Court by exercising jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. It is open to the Tahsildar concerned to pass an order with regard to the character of the subject land as well as the entitlement of the petitioner for the relief, as sought in this writ petition. It is open to the Tahsildar concerned to pass an order with regard to the character of the subject land as well as the entitlement of the petitioner for the relief, as sought in this writ petition. However, since the application, dated 07.08.2020, submitted by the petitioner has not been disposed of, the 4th respondent-Tahsildar, Venkatapuram Mandal, Khammam District, is directed to dispose of the said representation, dated 07.08.2020, filed by the petitioner, in accordance with law. 7. With the above observation/direction, this Writ Petition is disposed of. No costs. Miscellaneous Petitions, if any, pending in this writ petition shall stand closed.