Telangana High Court
Amgoth Laxman vs The State Of Telangana on 16 April, 2024
Author: K. Lakshman
Bench: K. Lakshman
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE K. LAKSHMAN
WRIT PETITION No.9669 OF 2024
ORDER :
Heard Sri M. Damodar Reddy, learned counsel for the petitioners and Sri Somu Srinivas Reddy, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue. Perused the record.
2. According to the petitioners, petitioner Nos.1 and 2 are grandsons and petitioner Nos.3 and 4 are the great grandsons of late Sri Ragiya Lambada (@ Antholu Ragai) respectively, who was the Protected Tenant of the land admeasuring Acs.20-00 Gts., in Sy.No.18 situated at Mallapur Village, Kottur Mandal, Ranga Reddy District. The Revenue Divisional Officer, Mahabubnagar, issued Form-I in File No.A10/11902/1974 under Section 38-E of the Andhra Pradesh (Telangana Area) Tenancy and Agricultural Lands, 1950 (for short, 'the Act, 1950'), in respect of the aforesaid property in favour of late Sri Ragiya Lambada. In proof of the same, petitioners have filed copy of certificate issued under Section 38-E of the Act, 1950. Late Sri Ragiya Lambada died on 10.09.2005 and they filed death certificate to that effect. They have 2 submitted written representation on 30.03.2024 to respondent No.2 with a request to implement the certificate issued under Section 38- E of the Act, 1950, and mutate their names in revenue records and issue e-pattadar passbooks. Despite receiving and acknowledging the said representation, respondent No.2 did not act upon the same.
3. In similar circumstances in order dated 19.01.2023 passed in W.P. No.844 of 2023, this Court relying upon the judgments dated 27.07.2021 and 28.09.2021 in W.P. Nos.14924 and 15031 of 2021 and W.A. No.451 of 2021 and the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Civil Appeal Nos.7996, 7997 and 7998 of 2016, directed the Tahsildar to consider the application submitted by the petitioners therein.
4. As discussed supra, petitioners have filed certificate issued under Section 38-E of the Act 1950 in favour of their ancestor. Though, late Sri Ragiya Lambada died on 10.09.2005, there is abnormal delay on the part of the petitioners in submitting the representation/application. There is no explanation, much less, plausible explanation from the petitioners for the said abnormal delay. However, despite receiving and acknowledging the said 3 representation/application, respondent No.2 did not act upon the same. Therefore, the present Writ Petition.
5. Whereas, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue, on instructions, would submit that respondent No.2 will consider the said representation/application submitted by the petitioners and pass appropriate orders in accordance with law.
6. In the light of the aforesaid discussion, this Writ Petition is disposed of directing respondent No.2 to consider the aforesaid application dated 30.03.2024 submitted by the petitioners with a request to implement the certificate issued under Section 38-E of the Act, 1950 and pass appropriate orders strictly in accordance with law, by putting the petitioners on notice and affording them an opportunity of hearing. If, respondent No.2 is not inclined to accept the request made by the petitioners, he shall assign specific reasons, pass a reasoned order and communicate copy of the said order to the petitioners. He shall complete the said exercise within a period of six (6) months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.
4
As a sequel thereto, miscellaneous applications, if any, pending in the writ petition stand closed. There shall be no order as to costs.
__________________ K. LAKSHMAN, J Date: 16.04.2024 MS