THE HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE SATISH CHANDRA SHARMA
AND
THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE A.RAJASHEKER REDDY
W.A.No.604 of 2021
JUDGMENT: (Per the Hon'ble the Chief Justice Satish Chandra Sharma)
The present writ appeal is arising out of the order dated
01.11.2021 passed by the learned Single Judge in
W.P.No.21369 of 2021.
The undisputed facts of the case reveal that the present
appellant, Arupula Jagan, wanted correction of revenue entries of
the year 1994-95, to the extent of Ac.0.08 guntas in Survey No.140
situated at Kankalagudem Village, recorded in the name of the
elder son of Ashaiah, who was certainly part of the family. He was
claiming partition in respect of the land, which was ancestral land,
and as he was claiming partition, his petition preferred before the
Special Tribunal was dismissed, after hearing the parties at length,
by order dated 02.02.2021. The Special Tribunal has held that it
is a partition dispute and the remedy lies somewhere else.
Against the order dated 02.02.2021, a review petition was
preferred. Notices were issued to the parties and finally, the review
petition has also been dismissed, vide order dated 26.06.2021.
Against the order dismissing the petition by the Special Tribunal
and also against the dismissal of the review petition, a writ petition
was preferred and the learned Single Judge has passed the
following order:-
"Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the
learned Government Pleader for Revenue for the respondent Nos. 1 to
6. With their consent, the Writ Petition is disposed of at the admission stage.
2
In this writ petition, the petitioner seeks to quash the order, dated 26.06.2021 in Appeal Case No. B/921/2019, passed by the Special Tribunal, Yadadri Bhuvanagiri District. By the impugned order, the learned Special Tribunal has disposed of the review petition filed by the petitioner with a direction to the parties to approach the appropriate forum to settle their partition dispute as the Tribunal is not competent to decide the same.
Having regard to the fact that the petitioner is challenging the revenue entries which were made almost three decades back, this Court does not find any illegality or infirmity with the order passed by the learned Tribunal. If the petitioner is so aggrieved, his remedy is to approach the competent civil court agitating his rights in respect of the subject property.
Accordingly, the writ petition is dismissed." Undisputedly, on claiming partition, the present appellant wanted the revenue entries of the year 1994-95 be changed in his name. The Special Tribunal has held that it is a question of partition of the ancestral property and the Tribunal is not competent to decide the partition disputes. The learned Single Judge has also arrived at a conclusion that the revenue entries, which were made almost three decades back, were the subject matter before the Special Tribunal and in those circumstances, the learned Single Judge has granted a liberty to approach the competent Civil Court. This Court also does not find any reason to interfere with the order passed by the learned Single Judge.
Admission is declined. The writ appeal sands dismissed. Pending miscellaneous applications, if any, shall stand closed.
___________________________ SATISH CHANDRA SHARMA, CJ ___________________________ A.RAJASHEKER REDDY, J 18.11.2021 JSU