S. Mallesh, Hyderabad District ... vs The Govt. Of A.P. Hyd And 4Ots
2023 Latest Caselaw 3113 Tel

         THE HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE ALOK ARADHE
                                      AND
         THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE N.V.SHRAVAN KUMAR


                   WRIT APPEAL No.311 of 2010

JUDGMENT: (Per the Hon'ble the Chief Justice Alok Aradhe)


       Mr.     P.Ravi      Kiran,     learned       counsel   representing

Mr. S.U.V.Srinivas, learned counsel for the appellants.

       Mr.       Parsa       Ananth         Nageswar        Rao,   learned

Government Pleader attached to the office of learned

Advocate General for the respondents.

2. This intra court appeal is filed against the order

dated 13.11.2009 passed by the learned Single Judge by

which the writ petition preferred by the appellants, namely

W.P.No.29386 of 1995, has been dismissed.

3. In order to appreciate the grievance of the appellants,

relevant facts need mention which are stated infra.

4. The appellants claim to be in possession of land

measuring Acs.5.29 guntas of Survey No.102/1 situate at

Hakimpet Village, Golkonda Mandal, Hyderabad District

(hereinafter referred to as, "the subject land"). The

appellants filed an application under Section 10 of the

Andhra Pradesh (Telangana Area) Abolition of Inams

Abolition Act, 1955 (hereinafter referred to as, "the Act") for

grant of Occupancy Rights Certificate (ORC) before the

Revenue Divisional Officer. The aforesaid application was

allowed by an order dated 25.08.1994 by the Revenue

Divisional Officer. In compliance of the aforesaid order, on

01.09.1994, ORC was issued to the appellants.

5. The State Government, being aggrieved by the order

passed by the Revenue Divisional Officer, filed an appeal

under Section 24 of the Act before the Joint Collector, who

by an order dated 16.12.1995 allowed the appeal. The

order passed by the appellate authority dated 16.12.1995

was assailed by the appellants in the writ petition. The

learned Single Judge by an order dated 13.11.2009 has

dismissed the writ petition. In the aforesaid factual

background, this appeal has been filed.

6. Learned counsel for the appellants submitted that

the subject land was granted to the ancestors of the

appellants for 'Neerudi' service. It is further submitted that

the Special Court by an order dated 07.09.1992 held that

the appellant No.1 and other respondents therein are not

the land grabbers and the fact whether the inam land was

granted towards 'Neerudi' service requires an adjudication

after an enquiry.

7. It is further submitted that enquiry under the Act

could not have been made. It is also contended that the

Joint Collector is not the competent authority to decide the

issue pertaining to title of the appellants.

8. On the other hand, learned Government Pleader has

stated that the subject land is not recorded as inam land in

the Inam Takhta Register of Hakimpet Village, but is

recorded as Government land. It is further submitted that

the Revenue Divisional Officer did not conduct a proper

enquiry to determine the fact whether or not the land in

question is inam land. It is also submitted that the

appellants failed to adduce any documentary evidence in

support of their claim. It is also submitted that the

findings recorded by the appellate authority are based on

appreciation of material available on record and the same

have rightly not been interfered with by the learned Single

Judge and therefore, no interference is called for in this

intra court appeal.

9. We have considered the submissions made on both

sides and have perused the record.

10. The appellate authority examined the records of the

initial survey conducted in 1330 F, the revised survey in

1334 F, the Inam Takhta Register of Hakimpet Village, the

pahanies, the faisal patties and the Town Survey Land

Register. The appellate authority thereupon recorded a

specific finding that the ORC was issued for the property

which was not an inam within the meaning of the Act. It

was further held that the subject land is Government land

and the appellants have failed to establish the grant of

inam in their favour. It was also held that the Revenue

Divisional Officer issued the ORC without any basis. The

learned Single Judge has examined the findings of the

appellate authority and affirmed the findings recorded by

the appellate authority that that land in question is not an

inam land. It was further held that the subject land was

recorded as Sarkari Kariz Katha in the Inam Takhta

Register and the record does not show that the same was

ever recorded as inam land. The learned Single Judge

further noticed that the appellants have failed to plead or

establish the fact that the Inam Takhta Register of

Hakimpet Village records the schedule land as inam

granted for discharging 'Neerudi' service. It was further

held that the appellants have also not assailed the

Hakimpet Village records either before the Revenue

Divisional Officer or the appellate authority, namely the

Joint Collector. The learned Single Judge therefore has

affirmed the order passed by the appellate authority.

11. The finding whether or not the land in question is an

inam land or not within the meaning of the Act is a finding

of fact. The appellate authority as well as the learned

Single Judge, on the basis of material available on record,

have held that the land in question is not an inam land,

but is a Government land. The appellants have failed to

adduce any material on record in support of their plea that

the land in question was an inam land. The concurrent

finding of fact recorded by the appellate authority as well

as by the learned Single Judge neither suffers from any

infirmity nor any error apparent on the face of the record

warranting interference by this Court in this intra court

appeal.

12. In the result, 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

12.10.2023 vs