Arupula Jagan vs The State Of Telangana
2021 Latest Caselaw 3556 Tel

  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.

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