Telangana High Court
WP/6487/2005 of Siklammetla Danaiah, Vs The District Collector, on 28 December 2005
SRI JUSTICE B.SESHASAYANA REDDY W.P.No. 6487 OF 2005 28th December, 2005 Between: Siklammetla Danaiah and Others …Petitioners A N D 1. The District Collector, Nalgonda and others …Respondents THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE B.SESHASAYANA REDDY W.P.No. 6487 OF 2005 O R D E R : 1.
28th December, 2005
Between:
Siklammetla Danaiah and Others …Petitioners A N D
1. The District Collector, Nalgonda and others …Respondents
Citations and Judicial Treatment
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…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
O R D E R :
1. This writ petition has been filed by the petitioners with a prayer to issue writ, orderor direction more particularly one in the nature of writ of mandamus declaring theaction of the 3[rd] respondent in not issuing Pattadar Pass Book and Title Deed infavour of the petitioners by holding necessary enquiry under A.P. Right in Land and Pattadar Pass Book Act, 1971 in respect of the lands admeasuring Ac.124.30 ½guntas situated in various survey numbers at Peepalpahad village, ChoutuppalMandal, Nalgonda District as illegal, arbitrary.
2. The petitioners claimed that they partitioned the family properties amongthemselves and submitted application to the Recording Authority i.e. MandalRevenue Officer, Choutuppal Mandal, Nalgonda District-3[rd] respondent for makingnecessary entries in the revenue records and for issuance of Pattadar Pass Bookand Title Deed.
3. It is the grievance of the petitioners that their application has not been disposed ofby the Recording Authority.
4. The learned Government Pleader on instructions from the 3[rd] respondent reportsthat some objection petitions have been filed and they are under consideration.
5. In that view of the matter, I deem it appropriate to dispose of the writ petitiondirecting the 3[rd] respondent to consider the application of the petitioners and passappropriate orders within six weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this orderafter giving opportunities to all the persons concerned. No order as to costs.
______________________________
Justice B.Seshasayana Reddy
28[th] December, 2005
KM
28th December, 2005