P. Vasumathi vs The Tahsildar
2023 Latest Caselaw 2739 Tel

  THE HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE ALOK ARADHE

                                AND

   THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE N.V.SHRAVAN KUMAR


               WRIT APPEAL No.684 of 2009


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


      Ms. Divya Adepu, learned counsel for the appellant.

      Mr.   Srinivas    Polavarapu,    learned    counsel   for

respondent No.3.

2. This intra court appeal has been filed against

an order dated 24.04.2009 passed in W.P.No.7119 of 2009

by learned Single Judge, by which writ petition preferred

by respondent No.3 has been allowed.

3. For the sake of convenience, the parties shall be

referred to in this order as per their ranking before the

learned Single Judge.

4. The Tahsildar, Medchal-Malkajgiri Mandal,

Ranga Reddy District, by an order dated 03.12.2008

directed deletion of name of the petitioner and three others ::2::

from the revenue records in respect of land measuring

Ac. 5.00 in Survey No.534 of Kishtapur Village, Hamlet of

Medchal-Malkajgiri Village and Mandal. The petitioner

challenged the validity of the aforesaid order in a writ

petition namely W.P.No.7119 of 2009 on the ground that

no notice was issued to him before passing the impugned

order.

5. Learned Single Judge by an order dated

24.04.2009 has set aside the order dated 03.12.2008

passed by the Tahsildar and has directed that the

Tahsildar shall issue notice to the petitioner and other

affected parties and thereafter pass a fresh order on the

representation made by respondent No.3.

6. Being aggrieved, appellant/respondent No.3 has

filed this intra court appeal inter alia on the ground that

even though she was arrayed as respondent No.3, yet no

notice of the petitioner was issued to her. It is therefore

submitted that impugned order dated 24.04.2009 be set

aside.

::3::

7. We have considered the submission made by

learned counsel for the appellant and have perused the

record.

8. Admittedly, the appellant was arrayed as

respondent No.3 in the writ petition. The learned Single

Judge has set aside the order dated 03.12.2008 on the

ground that the same has been passed without affording

any opportunity of hearing to the petitioner. The learned

Single Judge has not expressed any opinion on merits of

the claim of the parties, but has directed the Tahsildar to

issue a fresh notice to the petitioner and other affected

parties and thereafter to deal with the matter. Till now, a

Division Bench of this Court had entertained the writ

petition by an order dated 30.04.2009 and had directed the

parties to maintain status quo.

9. The order dated 24.04.2009 passed by the

learned Single Judge is innocuous in nature.

10. Needless to state that before passing an order,

the appellant as well as respondent No.3 shall be heard ::4::

and thereafter suitable orders shall be passed by the

Tahsildar, Medchal Mandal, Ranga Reddy District, in

accordance with law within an outer limit of four (04)

months from today.

11. To the aforesaid extent, the order dated

24.04.2009 passed in W.P.No.7119 of 2009 by learned

Single Judge is modified.

12. Accordingly, the Writ Appeal is disposed of.

There shall be no order as to costs.

As a sequel, miscellaneous applications pending, if

any, shall stand closed.

_______________________________ ALOK ARADHE, CJ

_______________________________ N.V.SHRAVAN KUMAR, J

Date: 26.09.2023 KL