N Mohammad Rafi vs B S Hidayathulla
2021 Latest Caselaw 2307 AP

             HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE JOYMALYA BAGCHI

                                        AND

              HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE K.SURESH REDDY

                           I.A. No.1 OF 2021
                                 IN/AND
                      WRIT APPEAL No.90 OF 2021
                          (Taken up through video conferencing)


COMMON JUDGMENT: (Per Hon'ble Sri Justice Joymalya Bagchi)

1.    I.A. No.1 of 2021 is filed by the applicant seeking leave to prefer an

Appeal against the order, dated 22.12.2020, passed by a learned single

Judge of this Court in Writ Petition No.24580 of 2020.


2.    Leave is granted.


3.    Appellant challenges the order, dated 22.12.2020, passed by a

learned single Judge in Writ Petition No.24580 of 2020, directing the

Tahsildar, Tanakal Mandal, respondent No.5 herein, to pass appropriate

order on the 1st respondent/writ petitioner's application, dated 24.06.2020,

for issuance of E-Pass Books and Title Deed Books in respect of the land

admeasuring an extent of Ac.2.00 cents in survey No.844/2 of Tanakal

Village and Mandal.

4. Learned counsel appearing for the appellant submits that he had

made an application on 16.09.2020 for recording his name in the record of

rights in respect of the aforesaid land under the A.P. Rights in Land and

Pattadar Pass Books Act, 1971 (for short, 'the Act of 1971'). Hence,

without considering the aforesaid application, impugned order could not

have been passed.

5. In response, Sri K.Srinivas, learned counsel for 1st respondent/writ

petitioner, as well as learned Government Pleader for Revenue, appearing

on behalf of respondent Nos.2 to 5, submits that the order was passed by JB, J & KSR, J

the learned single Judge in view of the proceedings in Rc.No.A/97/2020,

dated 16.06.2020, wherein the 5th respondent had held the 1st respondent

herein as pattadar and title holder of the land in question and directed the

village revenue authorities to make necessary entries in the Mandal and

Village accounts, immediately.

6. In rebuttal, learned counsel for the appellant submits that the said

order is without authority of law and was passed behind his back.

7. We have considered the materials on record. The order under

challenge is a consequence of the proceedings dated 16.06.2020, wherein

5th respondent/Tahsildar recorded the 1st respondent herein as patta

holder of the land in question and directed entry of his name in the

relevant records. It appears that the order, dated 16.06.2020, has not

been challenged by the appellant. It is also pertinent to note that the

application for entry of the name of the appellant in the revenue records

was made on 16.09.2020 after the aforesaid order was passed on

16.06.2020. Therefore, we do not find any illegality in the order passed by

the learned single Judge. At this stage, learned counsel for the appellant

seeks leave to challenge the aforesaid proceedings dated 16.06.2020. He

also submits a Civil Suit i.e., O.S. No.58 of 2021 is pending before the

learned Principal Junior Civil Judge, Kadiri, in respect of the self same

land. We do not choose to make any observation in this regard save and

except observing that the appellant shall be at liberty to take appropriate

recourse as available in law, if so advised.

8. With the above observation, the Writ Appeal is dismissed. No order

as to costs.

JB, J & KSR, J

9. As a sequel, miscellaneous applications pending, if any, shall stand

closed.

________________________ JOYMALYA BAGCHI, J

________________________ K.SURESH REDDY, J Date: 07-07-2021 Dsh