Telangana High Court
WP/20125/2024 of Andhra Pradesh Association of the Deaf Vs State of Telangana on 21 January 2026
IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) WEDNESDAY, THE TWENTY FIRST DAY OF JANUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE NAGESH BHEEMAPAKA WRIT PETITION NO: 20125 OF 2024 Betweqn; Andhra Pradesh Association of the Deaf,
I
l
,
[ 3300 I
IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA
AT HYDERABAD
(Special Original Jurisdiction)
WEDNESDAY, THE TWENTY FIRST DAY OF JANUARY
TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE NAGESH BHEEMAPAKA
WRIT PETITION NO: 20125 OF 2024
Betweqn;
Andhra Pradesh Association of the Deaf, Regd. No.442 1350 Fasli, Affiliated to the All lndia Federation of the Deaf, New Delhi. Office Room No. 1- 772. tt/odel School for Deaf, Vl Pedda Amber Pet, Hayath Nagar fMandal, Ranga Reddy District, Rep. by Venkat Reddy.
.....PETITIOI.JER
AND
1. State of Telangana, Rep by Principal Secretary, Energy Department, Secretariat Hyderabad, T.S.
2. Chairman and fVlanaging Director, Telangana State SPDCL, lMint Compound, Hyderabad
3. Divisional Engineer, Southern Power Distribution Company Limited, Turkayamjal, R. R District, Telangana.
4. M/s. Telangana Welfare Association, for the Deaf Regd No. 132112016
Address 7- 55, Madhurapuri, Near Konark Theater, Dilshuknagar, Saroornagar, Ranga Reddy, Telangana, lndia. Rep. by its Secretary Venkata Ramesh Bellamkonda, S/o. Venkata Satya Sai Kumar.
(
I
CT of R-4 is amended as per Court Order dated 09.09.2024 in .4.No.2120241.
.....RESPONDENTS
Petition Under Article 226 of the Constitution of lndia praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased to issue a writ or order or direction more particularly one in the nature of a Writ of Nlandamus or such other appropriate writ declaring the action of the Respondent No. 3 in passing the impugned mutation orders dated 05. 01 .2017 in mutating the name of the Respondents 4 in place of the name of the Petitioner Association and by directing the 3rd Respondent herein to rectify and re- incorporate the name of the Petitioner Association in the place of the 4
Respondr;nt Association in the records of the 3rd Respondent.
!.A.NO:1 rCF 2024
Pe':ition Under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affida'vit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to grant interim slay on mutation issued by the Respondent No.3 in favour of 4the Respondernt under reference No. cc90617993g7gg dated 05.01 .2017 as othenarise the Petitioners will be put to irreparable loss and inconvenience.
|.A.NO: 3 OF 2024
Petition Under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidarrit fileJ in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to pass necessar)'orders permitting the Petitioner Association to take out a notice to the Respondent No.4 in this Writ Petition by way of substituted service under order 5
rule 20 of cPC in any newspaper to be named by this Hon,ble court.
l.A.NO:t ()F 2A25
Petition Under Section 15'1 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidal'it filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to pass necessary orders permitting the petitioner to being on record the documents as per the enclosed list.
Counsel for the Petitioner : SRI DURGA PRASAD KOTAMRAJU
Counsel for the Respondent Nos.1 & 3 : G.p FOR ENERGY
counsel for the Respondent No.2 : sRl N.sREEDHAR REDDy (sc FoR
TELANGANA TRANSCO)
Counsel for the Respondent No.4 : SRI G.RAMA RAO
The Court made the following ORDER
i
V \r,
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR THE STATE OF
TELANGANA
HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE NAGESH BHEEMAPAI(A
WRIT PETITION No. 2O125 OF 2ol24
21.o1.20.26
Between:
Andhra Pradesh Association of the Deaf,
Rep. by Venkat ReddY
Petitioner,-
And
State of Telangana,
Rep. by its Principal Secretary,
Energr Department,
& 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.
ORDER:
Aggrieved by the order dated O5.01'2017 issued by the 3.d Respondent mutating the name of the 4th Respondent in place of Petitioner - Association, petitioner is before this Court' They consequently seek a direction to the 3'd Respondent to rectify and re-incorporate their name in the place of the 4tt' Respondent Association in the records of the 3'd Respondent.
2. Petitioner Association is represented by Sri Venkat Reddy, who claims to be its Executive committee Member and the only surviving member of the Management Committee since the General Secretary and some of the Executive
Membel's have been charged with the serious offences uide FIR No. 29C, of 2010 registered by P.S. Abdullapurmet in respect of fraud ptayed bY them- 2.1. It is contended, Petitioner Association has purchased land totally admeasuring Acs. 16.08 guntas in Survey Nos. 23O to 233 situated at Pedda Amberpet Village, Hayathnagar Mandal, Ranga Reddy District through Registered Sale Dr:eds. Some persons with vested interest and who had an evil eyr: on the said property got themselves registered as the 4ft Respondent Association in collusion with former Executive committee Members of Petitioner Association and have obtaint:d electricity connection in the name of the 4ttr Resporrdent Association in collusion with Respondents 2 and 3' Petitioner therefore, prayed to direct respondent authorities to rectify the same by incorporating the name of petitioner Associ,ation in its records. , b. Respondent No.3 filed counter contending that after llifurcation of composite State of Andhra Pradesh into State r>f Telangana and residuary State of Andhra Pradesh, the 4tt Respondent made an Application for change of name in respect of SC No. 631801052 which was released in the name of Moriel School for Deaf. Change of name was affected based J on the Application made by the 4th respondent along with supporting documents and on being satisfied that they were managing the said Model School. It is further contended that petitioner, except making bald allegations, has not filed any supporting documents to show that it was managing the affairs of the school.
4. Thq 4tf respondent fited counter denying the allegations of petitioner. They have put forth the litigation pending between various persons with regard to the subject matter. Besides that, it is asserted, as per the averments in the writ affidavit, the deponent himself stated that he is the only surviving member of the Management Committee of Petitioner Association and he has not el,en stated that he got authorisation to file Writ Petition, therefore he lacks jurisdiction to file this Writ Petition. Further petitioner is a defunct Association. According to this respondent, the issue as to who is managing the school for the deaf is a disputed question of fact which cannot be decided by this Court under Art 226 of the constitution of India.
4. L. It is stated, in 2O09, petitioner illegally alienated the property to Sri M.V. Srinivasa Rao and others uia sale deeds despite bye-laws prohibiting sales to private individuals (only to similar societies if defunct) and obtained mutation in their names; after coming to know of the same, the villagers informed District collector, who suo motu initiated proceedings under Section 9 of the A.P. Rights in Land and pattadar pass Books Act, l9'71, and after hearing the matter at length, set aside the mutation proceedings uide order dated 02-06-2012. Thereafter, crime l,lo.29o of 2o1o was also registered against petitioner's President/members. 4.2- Petitioner Society became defunct and was unable to continue the functioning of the school; on the advice of the District collector, the 4th respond.ent Society was duly constituted and till 2016, the principal Rajkumar Gour managerl the school by raising donations and thereafter, as Presiderrt of the Society, he has been looking after the welfare of the school and hostel and accordingly, subsequent to registration of society, the president, Sri Rajkumar Gour approac.eed the 2.d respondent and got mutated the name of the present Society in the official records in January 2oL7.lt is also stated, t,ased on the alleged registered sale deed, one Mr. Sambi Reddy, rvho is claiming to be a purchaser of the said property from thr: societ5r, approached the Tahsildar, Hayathnagar for :i i l a I i t t IIIt t t TI I
NALA conversion, by suppressing the earlier orders of the Joint Coliector dated 02.06.201.2, thetefore, the Tahsildar converted the land from agricultural to non-agricultural. Aggrieved by the said order, Appeal was filed before the Joint Collector wherein the respondent societ5r was impleaded and after hearing at. length, the Joint Collector, in its order dated O9.O5-2O23 cancelled thp NALA pe;mission granted by the Tahsildar, Abdullapurmet. Thereafter, the Joint collector directed Respondent No.4 to approach the civil court for cancellation of sale deeds and documents executed by the society'
4.3. Aggrieved by the same, it is stated, Sambi Reddy filed Writ Petition No. L64gS of 2023, wherein, the 4th respondent filed implead petition. Petitioner society with an intention to gain illegally tried. to interfere with the possession of respondent society. Respondent Society filed o.s-No. 23O of 2023 on the file of the Principal Senior Civil Judge's Court, Ranga Reddy District and obtained, status quo order. It is also stated, one Pilli Shivalimgam filed O.S.No. 93 of 2C23 on the file of the IV Additional District Judge, Ranga Reddy in respect of land in Survey Nos. 230 to 233 situated at Peddamberpet which is against the family members of Alladi Savithri and others who alienated the same in favour of Societ5r in'1988 and sought for reliefof<:ancellationofthesaidsaledeedandinthesaidsuit also, resllondent society fited imptead petition'
4.4. It is also stated' in 2023' the Principal of the respondt:ntsociet5rtefttheAssociationaSheisagedabout94 years, as such, the Society is reconstituted under the former Principal Secretary to Revenue Department Sri Chamarthy Uma Maheshwar Rao, Retired IAS was elected as President' It is stated that Petitioner failed to provide any documentary claim. The allegation that evidenc,: to substantiate their responctent Society illegally-managed the officials to mutate its nameirrtheplaceofpetitionersociet5rintherecordsisbaseless. Hence, it is prayed to dismiss the Writ Petition'
5. Heard Sri Durga Prasad' Kotamraju' learned counsel for petitioner, Sri N' Sreedhar Reddy' learned Standing Couns,:l for TGSPDCL and Sri Gokula Rama Rao' learned counst:l for ResPondent No'4'
6. On considering the rival submissions' it is seen thatt]reauthorisationfiled'bypetitionerisdated29.o4.2o23, however in the affidavit fited in support of the writ Petition, the deponent stated that he is the only surviving member of the Managing Committee of Petitioner Association since the Gener:al Secretary and some other Executive Members have i I I :
been charged with serious offences uid'e FIR No' 29O of 2O1O on the file of P.S. Abdutlapurmet in respect of the fraud played by thembyseliingawaythepropertiesbelongingtoAssociation.If the deponent is the only surviving member of the Managing Committee, no explanation is forthcoming as to how Resolution waspassedbytheManagingCommittee'authorizinghimtofile the Writ Petition in 2024.
7. Be that as it may, whether petitioner or the 4tl' RespondentismanagingtheaffairsofModelschoolforDeafis adisputedquestionoffactwhichcannotbegoneintobythis court under Article 226 0f constitution. The issue raised by petitionerisonlyregardingmutationeffectedintherecordsof the Electricity Department in respect of Service connection No' 631801052releasedinfavourofModelschoolforDeaf.As severalquestionsoffactareraisedbypetitionerandsincethe altegedauthorisationgiventodeponentofwritaffidavitlooks doubtful,inviewoftheavermentmadebythedeponentinthe affidavit, no relief can be granted as sought' This Court is of theopinionthatwritPetitiondeservesnoconsiderationand the same is liable to be dismissed' II ,(
8. Accordingly, the Writ Petition is dismissed' However, tiberty is granted to petitioner to raise the issue before competent court of civil jurisdiction. No costs' g. Consequently, the miscellaneous Applications, if any shall stand closed. / SD/- C. DEEPIKA REGISTRAR /TRUE COPY/ ECTION OFFICER
1. Two CC's to G.P FOR ENERGY, High Court for of Telangana at To SA GJP v' Hyderebad. (OUT)
2. o?'," c.c to SRI DURGA PRASAD KoTArytr{{Ui
5. on" t.c to SRt N.sREEDHAR REDDY (sc FoR TRANSCO) Advocate [OPUC]
4. o* c,b to'snt c.nnruin nno, Advocate (OPUC)
5. Two C;D CoPies Advocate [OPUC] TELANGANA
il *
€ HIGH COIURT DATE D:211011202G
ORDER
WP.No.20 125 of 2024 DISMISSING THE W.P WITHOUT COSTS. r.) 1' 2 5 r[B lr]?fr THE S Y c * * L 74 a