Gulam Mohinuddin v. The Revenue Divisional Officer & Anr.
Case at a glance
- Decided
- 24 Apr 2007
- Bench
- V V S RAO
Provisions considered
Judgment
THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE V.V.S.RAO WRIT PETITION No.8531 of 2007 ORDER: The petitioner claims to be the owner of the land admeasuring Acs.21.23 guntas comprised in Survey Nos.226 to 231, 190, 212, 266, 480 and 581 situated at Kattangur Village of Nalgonda District. He claims that the property was settled in favour of his mother, Rabia Bee, by one Gulam Mohammed, towards her Mehr. Be that as it is, he statedly filed an application under Section 4 of the Andhra Pradesh Rights in Land and Pattadar Pass Books Act, 1971 (for short ‘the Act’), before the Revenue Divisional Officer, Nalgonda, for necessary changes under Section 5 of the Act, in vain. He also sent remainder on 12.02.2007, and as there is no response, he filed the present Writ Petition seeking a direction to the respondents to consider his representation and pass orders. As rightly pointed out by the learned Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue (General-T), the first respondent is not competent authority nor recording authority to record the rights acquired by succession, sale, mortgage etc. Such power is conferred under Section 5(2) of the Act on the recording authority, namely, the Mandal Revenue Officer (now designated as Tahasildar). If so advised, the petitioner may approach the second respondent and file appropriate application. This Court also observes that as and when proper application is made, the second respondent shall conduct enquiry as contemplated under Section 5(3) and (4) of the Act before issuing orders under Section 5(2) of the Act and also keeping in view the Andhra Pradesh Rights in Land and Pattadar Pass Books Rules, 1989. The Writ Petition, with the above observations, is accordingly dismissed. No costs.
24.04.2007 ____________
(V.V.S.RAO, J)
Questions this judgment answers
Which statutory provisions did this judgment involve?
Land and Pattadar Pass Books Act, 1971.
Which court decided this case, and when?
Andhra Pradesh High Court, on 24 Apr 2007. The bench was V V S RAO.
Precedent status how later indexed judgments have treated this case
No known negative treatment found in the Courts & Cases corpus.
This is a result about the indexed corpus, not a finding that the judgment remains good law. Coverage may be incomplete.