THE HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE ALOK ARADHE
AND
THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE N.V.SHRAVAN KUMAR
Writ Appeal No. 738 of 2010
JUDGMENT: (Per the Hon'ble the Chief Justice Alok Aradhe)
Heard Mr. K.Ashok Reddy, learned counsel for the appellant;
Mr. M.Bharat Shah, learned counsel representing Mr. D.Linga Rao,
learned counsel for respondents No.1 to 4; and Mr. T.Srikanth
Reddy, learned Government Pleader for Revenue representing
respondents No.5 to 7.
2. This intra court appeal has been filed against order
dated 16.03.2009, passed by a learned Single Judge, by which writ
petition viz., W.P.No.27465 of 2008, preferred by respondents
No.1 to 4, has been disposed of in the following terms:
"Therefore, the writ petition is disposed of
directing that it shall be open to the petitioners to file
the applications in the prescribed form for issuance
of pattadar pass books in respect of their land before
the 3rd respondent within a period of four weeks from
today. In case, such applications are filed, they shall
be considered on their own merits and the police
authorities shall not take any steps on the basis of the
::2::
existing pattadar pass books. There shall be no order
as to costs."
3. Facts
giving rise to filing of this appeal briefly stated are that, respondents No.1 to 4, who are agriculturists, approached the Manager of State Bank of Hyderabad (briefly 'the Bank' hereinafter) with a request to advance loans. Respondents No.1 to 4 produced their pattadar pass books before the Bank, which, in turn, addressed communication dated 12.09.2008 to the Revenue Divisional Officer, Sircilla (respondent No.6) to verify the genuinity of the pattadar pass books.
4. The Revenue Divisional Officer, by communication dated 01.11.2008, informed the Manager of the Bank that out of six pattadar pass books, two were found to be genuine and no entries were found in the records maintained in the office of Tahsildar, Sircilla (respondent No.7), in respect of the remaining pattadar pass books. A copy of the communication was forwarded to the Station House Officer, Sircilla, for necessary investigation.
::3::
5. Respondents No.1 to 4/writ petitioners challenged the validity of the communication dated 01.11.2008 in the aforesaid writ petition.
6. Learned Single Judge disposed of the writ petition preferred by respondents No.1 to 4 with the direction as aforesaid.
7. Being aggrieved, the appellant, who is not a party to the proceeding before the learned Single Judge, has filed this appeal inter alia on the ground that he is the owner of the land in question.
8. We have heard learned counsel for the parties at length.
9. From a perusal of the proceeding sheet, it is evident that this appeal is pending before this Court since 2010 and no interim order has been passed. Respondents No.1 to 4 might have filed the applications for issuance of pattadar pass books before the Tahsildar, Sircilla. The fate of the applications, which might have been filed by respondents No.1 to 4/writ petitioners is also not known. Therefore, at this point of time, it is not necessary to ::4::
examine the validity of the order passed by the learned Single Judge.
10. However, it is clarified that neither this Court nor the learned Single Judge has expressed any opinion with regard to right, title or interest in respect of the land in question, which, in any case, has to be decided by the competent civil court.
11. At this point of time, no interference is called for with the order dated 16.03.2009, passed by the learned Single Judge, in W.P.No.27465 of 2008, as the direction issued therein has exhausted itself.
12. The Writ Appeal is, accordingly, disposed of. No costs.
As a sequel, miscellaneous petitions, pending if any, stand closed.
__________________ ALOK ARADHE, CJ _______________________ N.V.SHRAVAN KUMAR, J Date: 12.10.2023 LUR