Item No.6
THE HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE HIMA KOHLI
AND
THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE B. VIJAYSEN REDDY
WRIT APPEAL No.159 of 2020
JUDGMENT: (Per the Hon'ble the Chief Justice Hima Kohli)
1. The appellant/writ petitioner is aggrieved by the judgment and
order dated 20.02.2020 passed by the learned Single Judge disposing
of W.P.No.4449 of 2020 filed by her praying inter alia for setting
aside the order dated 07.02.2020, passed by the respondent No.2/Joint
Collector, Jagitial District and for declaring the 13-B and 13-C Certificate dated 23.02.2020, issued in favour of the respondent No.5 in respect of the land measuring Ac.1.17 guntas in Survey Nos.1310/3 and 4 of Korutla Revenue Village Sivar, Korutla Revenue Mandal, Jagitial District, as illegal and arbitrary.
2. In the impugned order, the learned Single Judge has observed that the main grievance of the appellant/writ petitioner was that while remanding the matter to the respondent No.4/Tahsildar for addressing arguments afresh, the respondent No.2/Joint Collector has directed that a 13-B Certificate be issued, which ought not to have been done and the matter ought to have rested at the point of directing the respondent No.4/Tahsildar to conduct a de novo enquiry after giving an opportunity of hearing to both parties. As a result, the observations made by the respondent No.2/Joint Collector regarding issuance of W.A.No.159 of 2020 Page 1 of 3 13-B Certificate afresh, was directed to be deleted. Instead, respondent No.4/Tahsildar was directed to conduct a de novo enquiry after giving an opportunity of hearing to both parties and thereafter, pass appropriate orders in accordance with law.
3. After addressing arguments for some time, Mr. C. Naresh Reddy, learned counsel for the appellant/writ petitioner states that his client does not wish to press the present appeal and is willing to appear before the respondent No.4 in terms of the impugned order, for a de novo enquiry to be conducted. However, he requests the interim order dated 16.03.2020 whereby, it was directed that the appellant/writ petitioner shall not be dispossessed from the subject property, may be extended for a reasonable period to enable her to file an appropriate application before the respondent No.4/Tahsildar.
4. The present appeal is accordingly disposed of along with the pending applications, if any. The interim order dated 16.03.2020 shall continue to operate for a period of four weeks. If the appellant/writ petitioner does not move an application within the aforesaid timeline or if such an application is moved but relief is declined to her by the respondent No.4 before expiry of four weeks, then the interim order shall stand automatically vacated. Needless to state that if aggrieved by the orders that may be passed by the respondent No.4, the appellant/writ petitioner and the respondent No.5 shall be entitled to seek appropriate legal recourse, as contemplated in the Statute. W.A.No.159 of 2020 Page 2 of 3
5. The parties are directed to appear before the respondent No.4/Tahsildar on 24.03.2021. They shall make their submissions and final orders shall be passed thereafter, preferably within four weeks from the date of conclusion of final arguments.
______________________________ HIMA KOHLI, CJ ______________________________ B. VIJAYSEN REDDY, J 01.03.2021 JSU W.A.No.159 of 2020 Page 3 of 3