BONGULA HANUMANTHU Vs. STATE OF TELANGANA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) It is stated that the petitioner is landless poor person and assigned land to an extent of Ac.0.38 guntas in Survey No.251 at Lathipuram Village of Berelli Revenue Village, Gadwal Mandal, Jogulamba Gadwal District, in terms of the policy enunciated by the Government in G.O.Ms.No.1406, dtd. 26/7/1958. It is further stated that final patta certificate was issued in File No.C/489/2009, dtd. 18/2/2009 for the aforesaid land. It is stated that the petitioner's name was also mutated in the revenue records after conducting panchanama to an extent of Ac.0.38 guntas vide proceedings, 1/3/2019, and possession was given after preparation of sub-division records for the lands in Sy.No.251. It is also stated that the petitioner was issued pattadar passbook No.655368 vide patta No.296 under the provisions of the Telangana Rights in Land and Pattadar Passbooks Act, 1971 (for short "the ROR Act, 1971") and the Rules made thereunder but he was not issued e- pattadar passbook under the provisions of the Telangana Rights in Land and Pattadar Passbooks Act, 2020 (for short "the Act 9 of 2020") to enable him to receive various incentives as investment subsidies for cultivation of the said land. Therefore, the petitioner made an application, dtd. 12/2/2024, seeking for issuance of e-Pattadar passbook and when the said application was not considered, he was constrained to file W.P.No.9443 of 2024 before this Court. Vide order, dtd. 15/4/2024, this Court, disposed of the said Writ Petition, directed the respondents to examine the claim of the petitioner and pass appropriate orders for issuance of e-Pattadar passbook. In compliance with the orders of this Court in W.P.No.9443 of 2024, it is stated that respondent No.2 has passed impugned orders vide File No.D1/533/2024, dtd. 23/1/2025, rejecting the petitioner's application. Hence, this Writ Petition.

(2.) Considered the submissions of the learned counsel for the respective parties and with their consent, this Writ Petition is being disposed of at the admission stage.

(3.) Learned counsel for the petitioner vehemently contended that the petitioner was assigned land to an extent of Ac.0.38 guntas in Survey No.251/3 after preparation of Sub-Division records and without considering the said fact, respondent No.2 has passed the impugned order. Learned counsel further submitted that issuance of e-pattadar passbook is only a consequential act of carrying the entries which have already been made under the provisions of the ROR Act, 1971 and the entries made in the pattadar passbook are only compilation of the survey numbers and the accounts for the extent being mentioned in a particular village and therefore, it does not take away the right of the petitioner in any manner unless the entries in the revenue records have been corrected by following due procedure.