Dr. Thotakura Seetharamaiah vs. The State Of Telangana

Held

The Court held that the petitioners (including the legal representatives of the deceased Petitioner No. 4) are permitted to submit their objections, explanations, or representations to the show cause notices dated 11.08.2016. The Court directed that any representations made by the petitioners shall be disposed of as previously directed in W.P. No. 28467 of 2016, dated 09.12.2025. The Collector, Bhadradri-Kothagudem, was suo motu impleaded as a party respondent, a direction also made in the similar case. The Court disposed of the writ petition in terms of the order passed in W.P. No. 28467 of 2016, without any order as to costs. The reasoning was based on the similarity of the subject matter to the previously decided case and the need to allow petitioners to present their objections.

Facts

The petitioners, Dr. Thotakura Seetharamaiah and others, filed a writ petition challenging show cause notices dated 11.08.2016 issued by the District Collector, Khammam (Respondent No. 2). These notices proposed the cancellation of pattedar pass books and title deeds concerning lands in Survey No. 17 of Laxmidevipally village, Kothagudem Mandal, Khammam District. The petitioners contended that these notices were illegal, arbitrary, without jurisdiction, and violative of natural justice. The State of Telangana, through its Principal Secretary, Revenue Department, and other revenue authorities were the respondents. One of the petitioners, Petitioner No. 4, had passed away, and the court granted liberty to his legal heirs to file objections. The court noted that the subject matter was similar to a previously decided writ petition, W.P. No. 28467 of 2016.

Key Issues

1. Whether the show cause notices dated 11.08.2016 issued by the District Collector, Khammam, for the cancellation of pattedar pass books and title deeds are illegal, arbitrary, contrary to record, without jurisdiction, and violative of the principles of natural justice, as contended by the petitioners? Petitioners' arguments: - The show cause notices are illegal, arbitrary, contrary to record, without jurisdiction, and violative of the principles of natural justice. - The subject matter is identical to W.P. No. 28467 of 2016, which was disposed of by this Court with similar directions. - Liberty should be granted to the legal heirs of the deceased Petitioner No. 4 to approach the authorities and file objections/explanations/representations to the show cause notices. Respondents' arguments: - The learned Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue did not dispute the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioners.