IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD THE HON’BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE SRI APARESH KUMAR SINGH AND THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE G.M.MOHIUDDIN WRIT APPEAL Nos.595 AND 689 OF 2026 Dated: 12.08.2026 Writ Appeal No.595 of 2026: Between: D. Venkata Ramana, S/o. D. Balaiah …Appellant and Avula Kalavathi, W/o. Chinna Naganna, Aged about 34 years, Occ: Agriculture, R/o. Pentlavelli Village and Mandal, Nagarkurnool District and 9 others …Respondents Writ Appeal No.689 of 2026: Between: D. Chinna Pentaiah, S/o. D. Yellaiah (Died per Lrs.) and 4 others …Appellants and Avula Kalavathi, W/o. Chinna Naganna, Aged about 30 years, Occ: Agriculture, R/o. Pentlavelli Village and Mandal, Nagarkurnool District and 9 others …Respondents 2 COMMON JUDGMENT: Heard Mr. C.V.R. Rudra Prasad, learned counsel appearing for the appellants, Mr. T. Srikanth Reddy, learned counsel appearing for respondent Nos.1 and 2/writ petitioners, Mr. Muralidhar Reddy Katram, learned Government Pleader for Revenue, appearing for respondent Nos.3 to 7 and Mr. Kiran Kumar Gattu, learned Standing Counsel for Bhoodan Yagna Board, appearing for respondent No.8.

2. The learned writ Court vide order dated 20.08.2025 passed in W.P.No.19335 of 2021, while setting aside the order dated 30.06.2021 passed by the learned Special Tribunal, Nagarkurnool District, has remanded the matter to the revisional authority i.e., the Special Tribunal, to decide the matter afresh, after providing an opportunity of hearing to the writ petitioners and all concerned parties, by following the procedure established by law. 3. The writ petitioners were aggrieved by the order dated 30.06.2021 passed by the learned Special Tribunal, setting aside the mutation proceedings issued by the Tahsildar, Pentlavally Village, in favour of the writ petitioners. The writ petitioners claim possession and title over the subject land on the basis of allotment by the Bhoodan Yagna Board, after 3 cancellation of assignment in favour of private respondents No.7 to 9 in the Writ Petition.

4. The learned Special Tribunal, during the course of revisional proceedings, had relied upon a letter of the Bhoodan Yagna Board dated 10.06.2020 to the effect that the claim of writ petitioners with regard to allotment of Bhoodan land in their favour was false, as no records were available with it to prove such allotment. It has also clarified that the earlier allotment made in favour of the appellants was genuine and had not been cancelled. The learned Special Tribunal, therefore, has set aside the mutation proceedings issued in favour of the writ petitioners, which compelled them to approach the learned writ Court. 5. In the writ proceedings, counter affidavits were filed by the Bhoodan Yagna Board, which was impleaded as a party for the first time, and also by the unofficial respondents. 6. After perusal of the materials on record and upon hearing learned counsel for the respective parties, the learned writ Court passed the impugned order, wherein it was held as under: “5. A perusal of the material placed on record before this Court and the impugned proceedings of respondent No.2 in File No.ST/D1/568/2021 in Case No.B/607/2020, dated 30.06.2021 reveals that without going through the records has passed the impugned order, which is in violation of the principles of natural justice. 4

6. Under these circumstances, this Court deems it appropriate to set aside the impugned order passed by respondent No.2 in File No.ST/D1/568/2021 in Case No.B/607/2020, dated 30.06.2021, and to remand the matter back to the revisional authority – respondent No.2 constituted under Section 15(1) of the Bhu Bharathi Act, 2025, who shall, in turn, afford an opportunity of hearing to the petitioners and all concerned parties as by procedure established by law and upon examination of the records pass appropriate orders in accordance with law, as expeditiously as possible, preferably within six months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.” 7. The unofficial respondent Nos.7 and 8 in the Writ Petition, who claim to be the assignees of the Bhoodan land, being aggrieved by the impugned order, have preferred the instant appeals.

8. Upon hearing learned counsel for the parties and perusing the materials placed on record, we are of the considered view that the issues regarding assignment of the subject land by the Bhoodan Yagna Board in favour of the writ petitioners; the claim of the Bhoodan Yagna Board that the original assignment in favour of the appellants herein was never cancelled and the contention of the writ petitioners that the entire proceedings relating to cancellation of the assignment granted in favour of the appellants and grant of fresh assignment pattas in their favour by the Bhoodan Yagna Board, as are lying before the revenue authorities, are bordering on determination of facts which has to be made by the learned Special Tribunal being the proper authority. Moreover, in the order 5

dated 30.06.2021, the learned Special Tribunal had straightaway set aside the mutation made in the revenue records in favour of the writ petitioners by relying upon a letter of the Bhoodan Yagna Board, which was not impleaded as a party therein, denying an opportunity to the writ petitioners to contest such stand on facts, by producing documents, if any, in their support. In such circumstances, even though pleadings have been filed contesting the claim of assignment of Bhoodan land in favour of the writ petitioners by the Bhoodan Yagna Board and grant of mutation in favour of the writ petitioners in an irregular manner by the Tahsildar without proper enquiry, the learned writ Court was justified in not entering into the issues of fact, which are required to be decided by the learned Special Tribunal having jurisdiction under the Telangana Bhu Bharati (Record of Rights in Land) Act, 2025 (Act No. 1 of 2025). It is also worth to mention here that the appellants have instituted O.S.No.122 of 2015 on the file of Junior Civil Judge, Kollapur, seeking injunction over the same subject land. All these material facts are required to be taken into consideration by the learned Special Tribunal by giving an opportunity to the parties and after following the procedure established by law and examination of the records. Therefore, the approach of the learned writ Court in the 6

aforesaid facts and background circumstances cannot be faulted. Therefore, we do not find any reason to interfere with the impugned order. 9. The instant Writ Appeals are accordingly dismissed. 10. It is clarified that the observations, if any, made by this Court would not influence the learned Special Tribunal for consideration of the case. There shall be no order as to costs. Miscellaneous applications pending, if any, shall stand closed. ______________________________________ APARESH KUMAR SINGH, CJ ______________________________________ G.M.MOHIUDDIN, J Date: 12.08.2026 MD

IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD THE HON’BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE SRI APARESH KUMAR SINGH AND THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE G.M.MOHIUDDIN WRIT APPEAL Nos.595 AND 689 OF 2026 Dated: 12.08.2026 Writ Appeal No.595 of 2026: Between: D. Venkata Ramana, S/o. D. Balaiah …Appellant and Avula Kalavathi, W/o. Chinna Naganna, Aged about 34 years, Occ: Agriculture, R/o. Pentlavelli Village and Mandal, Nagarkurnool District and 9 others …Respondents Writ Appeal No.689 of 2026: Between: D. Chinna Pentaiah, S/o. D. Yellaiah (Died per Lrs.) and 4 others …Appellants and Avula Kalavathi, W/o. Chinna Naganna, Aged about 30 years, Occ: Agriculture, R/o. Pentlavelli Village and Mandal, Nagarkurnool District and 9 others …Respondents 2 COMMON JUDGMENT: Heard Mr. C.V.R. Rudra Prasad, learned counsel appearing for the appellants, Mr. T. Srikanth Reddy, learned counsel appearing for respondent Nos.1 and 2/writ petitioners, Mr. Muralidhar Reddy Katram, learned Government Pleader for Revenue, appearing for respondent Nos.3 to 7 and Mr. Kiran Kumar Gattu, learned Standing Counsel for Bhoodan Yagna Board, appearing for respondent No.8.

2. The learned writ Court vide order dated 20.08.2025 passed in W.P.No.19335 of 2021, while setting aside the order dated 30.06.2021 passed by the learned Special Tribunal, Nagarkurnool District, has remanded the matter to the revisional authority i.e., the Special Tribunal, to decide the matter afresh, after providing an opportunity of hearing to the writ petitioners and all concerned parties, by following the procedure established by law. 3. The writ petitioners were aggrieved by the order dated 30.06.2021 passed by the learned Special Tribunal, setting aside the mutation proceedings issued by the Tahsildar, Pentlavally Village, in favour of the writ petitioners. The writ petitioners claim possession and title over the subject land on the basis of allotment by the Bhoodan Yagna Board, after 3 cancellation of assignment in favour of private respondents No.7 to 9 in the Writ Petition.

4. The learned Special Tribunal, during the course of revisional proceedings, had relied upon a letter of the Bhoodan Yagna Board dated 10.06.2020 to the effect that the claim of writ petitioners with regard to allotment of Bhoodan land in their favour was false, as no records were available with it to prove such allotment. It has also clarified that the earlier allotment made in favour of the appellants was genuine and had not been cancelled. The learned Special Tribunal, therefore, has set aside the mutation proceedings issued in favour of the writ petitioners, which compelled them to approach the learned writ Court. 5. In the writ proceedings, counter affidavits were filed by the Bhoodan Yagna Board, which was impleaded as a party for the first time, and also by the unofficial respondents. 6. After perusal of the materials on record and upon hearing learned counsel for the respective parties, the learned writ Court passed the impugned order, wherein it was held as under: “5. A perusal of the material placed on record before this Court and the impugned proceedings of respondent No.2 in File No.ST/D1/568/2021 in Case No.B/607/2020, dated 30.06.2021 reveals that without going through the records has passed the impugned order, which is in violation of the principles of natural justice. 4

6. Under these circumstances, this Court deems it appropriate to set aside the impugned order passed by respondent No.2 in File No.ST/D1/568/2021 in Case No.B/607/2020, dated 30.06.2021, and to remand the matter back to the revisional authority – respondent No.2 constituted under Section 15(1) of the Bhu Bharathi Act, 2025, who shall, in turn, afford an opportunity of hearing to the petitioners and all concerned parties as by procedure established by law and upon examination of the records pass appropriate orders in accordance with law, as expeditiously as possible, preferably within six months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.” 7. The unofficial respondent Nos.7 and 8 in the Writ Petition, who claim to be the assignees of the Bhoodan land, being aggrieved by the impugned order, have preferred the instant appeals.

8. Upon hearing learned counsel for the parties and perusing the materials placed on record, we are of the considered view that the issues regarding assignment of the subject land by the Bhoodan Yagna Board in favour of the writ petitioners; the claim of the Bhoodan Yagna Board that the original assignment in favour of the appellants herein was never cancelled and the contention of the writ petitioners that the entire proceedings relating to cancellation of the assignment granted in favour of the appellants and grant of fresh assignment pattas in their favour by the Bhoodan Yagna Board, as are lying before the revenue authorities, are bordering on determination of facts which has to be made by the learned Special Tribunal being the proper authority. Moreover, in the order 5

dated 30.06.2021, the learned Special Tribunal had straightaway set aside the mutation made in the revenue records in favour of the writ petitioners by relying upon a letter of the Bhoodan Yagna Board, which was not impleaded as a party therein, denying an opportunity to the writ petitioners to contest such stand on facts, by producing documents, if any, in their support. In such circumstances, even though pleadings have been filed contesting the claim of assignment of Bhoodan land in favour of the writ petitioners by the Bhoodan Yagna Board and grant of mutation in favour of the writ petitioners in an irregular manner by the Tahsildar without proper enquiry, the learned writ Court was justified in not entering into the issues of fact, which are required to be decided by the learned Special Tribunal having jurisdiction under the Telangana Bhu Bharati (Record of Rights in Land) Act, 2025 (Act No. 1 of 2025). It is also worth to mention here that the appellants have instituted O.S.No.122 of 2015 on the file of Junior Civil Judge, Kollapur, seeking injunction over the same subject land. All these material facts are required to be taken into consideration by the learned Special Tribunal by giving an opportunity to the parties and after following the procedure established by law and examination of the records. Therefore, the approach of the learned writ Court in the 6

aforesaid facts and background circumstances cannot be faulted. Therefore, we do not find any reason to interfere with the impugned order. 9. The instant Writ Appeals are accordingly dismissed. 10. It is clarified that the observations, if any, made by this Court would not influence the learned Special Tribunal for consideration of the case. There shall be no order as to costs. Miscellaneous applications pending, if any, shall stand closed. ______________________________________ APARESH KUMAR SINGH, CJ ______________________________________ G.M.MOHIUDDIN, J Date: 12.08.2026 MD