THE HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE ALOK ARADHE
AND
THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE N.V.SHRAVAN KUMAR
WRIT APPEAL No.729 of 2023
JUDGMENT: (Per the Hon'ble the Chief Justice Alok Aradhe)
Ms. N.Praveena, learned counsel representing
Mr. Katika Ravinder Reddy, learned counsel for the
appellants.
Mr. P.Venu Gopal, learned Senior Counsel,
representing Mr. Dasari Krishna Reddy, learned counsel
for respondents No.2 to 9.
2. This intra court appeal has been filed by the
appellants, who are respondents No.6 and 7 in the writ
petition, namely W.P.No.3581 of 2016, against the order
dated 20.12.2022 by which the said writ petition preferred
by respondents No.1 to 9 herein has been allowed with a
direction the Joint Collector - II, the Special Grade Deputy
Collector & Revenue Divisional Officer and the Tahsildar to
consider the application dated 05.11.1993 submitted by
2
writ petitioner No.1 seeking to enter his name in the
revenue records.
3. The parties shall be referred to as per their rankings
before the learned Single Judge.
4. Facts
giving rise to filing of this appeal briefly stated are that petitioner No.1 submitted a representation dated 05.11.1993 to the Tahsildar for conducting local inspection and for a further direction to enter his name in the possession column of pahanies for the year 1992-1993 in respect of the land bearing Survey Nos.46 and 31 of Upperapally Village. The Tahsildar, by an order dated 17.08.2013, rejected the claim of the petitioner No.1. The petitioner No.1 thereupon filed an appeal under Section 5-B of the Telangana Rights in Land and Pattadar Pass Books Act, 1971 (hereinafter referred to as the "1971 Act"), before the Revenue Divisional Officer. The appeal preferred by the petitioner No.1 was disposed of by an order dated 21.01.2015 by issuing various directions to the Tahsildar. The private respondents filed two revision cases before the Joint Collector, who by an order dated 05.12.2015 3 disposed of both the revisions and set aside the order passed by the Revenue Divisional Officer. The said order was challenge by the petitioners in the writ petition. The learned Single Judge, by an order dated 20.12.2022, set aside the orders passed by the Tahsildar, the Revenue Divisional Officer and the Joint Collector, dated 17.08.2013, 21.01.2015 and 05.12.2015 respectively. The learned Single Judge further held that in view of the repeal of the 1971 Act, by the Telangana Rights in Land and Pattadar Pass Books Act, 2020, the Tahsildar cannot consider the application dated 05.11.1993. Therefore, the learned Single Judge opined that he is not inclined to remit the matter to the Tahsildar, the Revenue Divisional Officer and the Joint Collector. However, the following observation was made in the concluding paragraph of the order passed by the learned Single Judge:
6. In the circumstances, this Court does not find any reason to remand the matter back to respondent Nos.1 to 3 herein and deems it appropriate to leave it open to the parties to agitate their claims in accordance with law by initiating appropriate proceedings. In case, if any such proceedings are initiated by any of the parties, it is open for the authorities concerned to pass 4 appropriate orders, in accordance with law, without reference to any of the findings or observations recorded in the orders passed by respondent Nos.1 to 3 herein, within a period of three (3) months from the date of initiation of such proceedings.
5. Being aggrieved, this writ appeal has been filed on the ground that the learned Single Judge ought to have relegated the petitioners to avail of the remedy of civil suit.
6. From a perusal of paragraph 6 of the order passed by the learned Single Judge, it is evident that the liberty has been reserved to the parties to agitate their claims in accordance with law by initiating appropriate proceedings. It has further been directed that in case such proceedings are initiated by any of the parties, the authorities concerned shall decide the same within a period of three months.
7. It is pertinent to note that in pursuance of the aforesaid liberty, the writ petitioners have already approached the Joint Collector wherein the appellants have entered their appearance. Therefore, it is open for them to 5 raise the objection with regard to the maintainability of the proceedings, if so advised.
8. In view of the aforesaid, we do not find any ground to entertain the writ appeal.
9. The writ appeal fails and is hereby dismissed.
Miscellaneous applications pending, if any, shall stand closed. However, there shall be no order as to costs.
______________________________________ ALOK ARADHE, CJ ______________________________________ N.V.SHRAVAN KUMAR, J 08.11.2023 vs