Telangana High Court

WP/27800/2005 of Khaja Mohammed Rasool Vs The Mandal Revenue Officer, Serilingampally Mandal on 28 December 2005

Cites 0, Cited by 0

SRI JUSTICE V.V.S.RAO WRIT PETITION NO.27800 OF 2005 DATED:28.12.2005 Between: Khaja Mohammed Rasool …Petitioner And The Mandal Revenue Officer Serilingampally Mandal, R.R.District. …Respondent THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE V.V.S.RAO WRIT PETITION NO.27800 OF 2005 ORDER:

THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE V.V.S.RAO

WRIT PETITION NO.27800 OF 2005

DATED:28.12.2005

Between:Khaja Mohammed Rasool

And

The Mandal Revenue OfficerSerilingampally Mandal, R.R.District.

…Petitioner

…Respondent

THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE V.V.S.RAO

Citations and Judicial Treatment

No citing decisions in the index yet

Cited by

0

Decisions in the index citing it

Cites

0

Decisions referred to

In this index

0

Of the decisions it cites

Overruled / Questioned

0

No negative treatment found

Loading the citing and cited decisions…

ORDER:

WRIT PETITION NO.27800 OF 2005

The petitioner allegedly purchased land in S.Nos.14, 20, 21, 22, 23 situated atDarga Hussain Shawli Village, Serilingampally Mandal, Ranga Reddy District,under registered sale deed dt.18.3.1971. However, he could not get necessarychanges in the revenue records. Pursuant to the amendment made by theGovernment to A.P.Rights in Land and Pattadar Pass Books Rules, 1989 (for short,the Rules), the petitioner submitted an application on 10.11.2005 requesting tomutate his name in the revenue records, in vain. Therefore, he filed the present WritPetition.

As per Rule 22(2) of the Rules, a person who gets title under valid transaction was required to file application in form-X before the competent authority on or before31.10.1998. By G.O.Ms.No.1765, dt.6.10.2005 the Government amended Rule 22(2)permitting alienee or transferee to file application on or before 31.12.2005 in respectof any transaction that took place on or before 31.12.2005. If the petitioner’scontention is true, that he purchased the property from Yarukali Girijamma underregistered sale deed dt.18.3.1971, even if the petitioner did not make applicationprior to 31.10.1998, by reason of the amendment to Rule 22(2), his application shallhave to be considered by the respondent.

Therefore, after hearing the learned counsel for the petitioner, and the learnedAssistant Government Pleader for Revenue (General), who does not dispute thelegal position, the Writ Petition is disposed of directing the respondent to considerthe application of the petitioner dt.10.11.2005 – if such application is made by thepetitioner – and pass appropriate orders in the matter within a period of eight weeks,after giving notice to the vendor of the petitioner.

_______________

28.12.2005 (V.V.S.RAO, J)Note:Issue CC by 30.12.2005.(B.O)bnr

You have used today's free searches. Sign in, for free, to keep searching without a limit.

Compass reads the judgments for you and finds the paragraphs for and against your question. Sign in to use it.

My Vault follows judgments for you and records every later decision that cites them. Sign in to keep one.

Sign in to download the court's PDF. The full text stays free to read here.

Sign in, for free, to download the court copy. Reading the full text here stays open to everyone.

Search and read Indian judgments without limits, save them to My Vault and find the relevant paragraphs with Compass.

Open the sign-in page instead