High Court · 2025

8. Mididoddi Swapna, Wo. Late Sridhar, Aged about 34 years, Occ, Corporator. Rio. Mididoddiwada, hanuman Temple Lane, Waddepally, Hanmakonda. .....RESPONDENTS Petition Under Article 226 of the Constitution of lndia praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased to issue a Writ or order or Direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Certiorari calling for the Records relating to the Revision Petition in R.C.No. 4/3885/2013 on the file of 2nd Respondent declare the same as illegal arbitrary and contrary to the provisions of the A.P. Rights in Land in Pattedari Pass Books Act, 1971 and setaside the orders of the 2nd Respondent in Revision Petition No.E3/941/2018, Dated 14-09-2018 confirming the Orders passed by the ri Respondent and orders passed by the 3rd Respondent in R.C.No. A/3885/2013, Dated. 03-02-2018 in the interest of justice. I.A.NO:1 OF 2018 Petition Under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to stay of the operation of the orders passed by the 3rd Respondent in R. C .No.4/3885/20'13, Dated.03-02-2018 as confirmed by the 2nd Respondent in Revision Petition No.E3/941/2018, Dated.14-09-20'18 pending disposal of the above petition in the interest of justice. Counsel for the Petitioners : SRI R.DHEERAJ SINGH Counsel for the Respondent Nos.1 to 4 : Mrs. S.SRAVANTHI, AGP FOR REVENUE Counsel for the Respondent Nos.5 to 8 : SRI D.MADHAVA RAO The Gourt made the following ORDER w Poge I of U sK,t wP No.41770 oJ 2078 THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE K.SARATH WRIT PETITION No.4377O of 2OL8 ORDER: Heard Sri R.Dheeraj Singh, learned Counsel for the petitioners, Mrs.S.Sravanthi, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue and Sri D.Madhava Rao, learned Counsel for the respondent Nos.S to 8

2. The learned Counsel for the petitioner '*'ould submit that, the petitioner Nos. I and 2 are the owners and possessors of land admeasuring to an extent of Ac.0.16 guntas each in Sy.No.84O/BlF I L, situated at Waddepall-v Revenue Village, Hanmakonda Mandal, Warangal District (hereinafter referred to as 'subject lands') having acquired from their ancestors. In the year 2OlO, upon the application made by the petitioners, the respondent No.4 after thorough enquiry issued Pattadar Pass Poge 2 of 11 sttJ WP No.43770 of 2O18 Books and title deeds to the petitioners vide Proc.RC No.D2/33g7 i2OlO in respect ol the subject lands. While it being so, when the respondent Nos.5 to 8 who are strangers, tried to interfcre u,ith the possession of the petil.ioners over the subject lands, the petitioners filed O.S.No.1g7 of 2013 on the file of V-Additional Junior Civil Judge, Warangai for permanent injunction, in which the petitioners have obtained temporary rnjunction in I.A.No.202 of 2013. Having receivecl notices in the sarci I.A., the rcspondent Nos.S to ,3, suppressing the material facts, filed Appeal uncler Section S_B ol- ROR Act belore the respondent No.3 seeking cancellation of Pattadar Pass Books issued by the respondent No.4 vide RC No.A/3885/2013. The petitioners herein filed counter in the sai<t Appeal stating about civil disputes between the petrties as well as pendency of . Poge 3 of 77 sK,1 WP No.43770 of 2078 O.S.No.187 of 2013. Th'e petitioners have also taken plea that the respondent No.3 has no jurisdiction to entertain appeal. However, the respondent No.3 without considering the contentions raised by the petitioners, erroneously allowed the appeal. Aggrieved by the orders passed by the respondent No.3, the petitioners filed Revision before the respondent No.2 vide Revision Petition No.E3/941/2018 and said revision was dismissed confirming the orders passed by the respondent No.3. Aggrieved by the same, the present writ petition is filed.

3. The learned Counsel for the petitioners submits that the respondent Nos.2 and 3 treating the suit hled by the petitioners as title dispute, allowed the appeal and rejected the revision filed by the petitioners. In fact the petitioners hled injunction Poge 4 of 71 sK,t wP No.43770 of 2018 suit against the unofficial respondents 1n O.S.No. 187 of 2013 on the hle of V Additional Junior Civil Judge, Warangal. The respondents 2 and 3 without considering the contention of the petitioners about the maintainability of the appeal filed by the respondent Nos.S to 8 and also contrary to the varl0us Judgments o1' this Court, the respondent No.3 allor,r,ed the appeal and cancelled the pattadar pass books and title cleeds issued in favour of the petitioners on the grolrnd that the petitioners have not produced orders in I.A.No.2O2 of 20 13 in O.S.No.187 of 2013 dated 06.03.2013 and allowed the appeal treating the dispute betu,een the petitioners and the unofficia_l respondents as title dispute and cancelled the pattadar pass books and title deeds issued in [avour of the petitioners 1n respect of the subject lands. w Pqge 5 of 77 sK,t wP No.43770 ol2078 +. The learned Counsel for the petitioners further submits that the respondent No.2 without considering the contention raised by the petitioners in the revision petition and also the Judgments relied on by the petitioners herein, merely basing on the orders passed by the respondent No.3 given a finding that cancellation of pattadar pass books does not come into way of deciding the title dispute by the competent civil Court and the revenue records can be changed at any time basing on the order of the competent Civil Court and the respondent No.2 has passed a cryptic orders and the same is liable to be set aside and requested to allow the Wnt Petition.

5. The learned Counsel for the unofficial respondents basing on the counter filed by the \r€spondent Nos.S to 8 would submit that both the ' -.i :-! sK,t WP No.43770 ol2018 appellate and revisional authorities have considered both larv and facts while deciding the rniltter. The respondents have questioned the issuance of Pattadar pass books to the petitioners on vaIlous grounds including the pendency of Civil Suit in O.S.No.l87 l2Ol3 where there was a restraint order in force which fact was suppressed. The appellate authority as well as Rr:visional authority have given a clear hnding on the subject matter inter alia should not give any ground or reasons to feel aggrieved as the Joint Coliector has given a linding wherein it was stated that "however the cancelling of Pattadar Pass Books does not come into way of deciding the title by competent civil court and the revenue recrtrd can be changed at any time based on the competent civil Court order. There are no merits Pqge 7 oJ 77 sK,l WP No.43770 ol 2018 in the writ petition and requested to dismiss the writ petition.

6. After hearing both sides and upon perusing the record, this Court is of the considered vierv that the petitioners are the owners and possessors of the subject lands. In view of interference by the unofficial respondents herein the petitioners filed a suit in O.S.No. 187 of 2013 on the file of V Additional Junior Civil Judge, Warangal and also obtained interims orders in I.A.No.2O2 of 2Ol3 on

06.03.20 13. Thereafter, the unofhcial respondents have hled ROR Appeal vide File No.A/3885/2O13 for cancellation of the pattadar pass books and title deeds issued in favour of the petitioners in respect of the subject lands and the said appeal as allowed on O3.O2.2Ola by cancelling the pattadar pass books and title deeds issued in favour of the petitioners on Poqe I of 71 SK,J WP No.43770 ol2018 the ground that the petitioners have not produced the copy of interim orders passed in I.A.No.202 of 2013 in O.S.No.l87 o12013 and also in view of title dispute pending beforr: the Civil Court. Aggrieved by the said orders, the petitioners herein filed revision before the respondent No.2 under Section 9 of ROR Act, by raising various grounds including the maintainability ol the appeal filed by the unofhcial respondents before the respondent No.3 by relying on various Judgment:; ol this Court. But the respondent No.2 without taking into account of the contentions raised by the petitioners, merely basing on the orders passe<l by the respondent No.3, stating that cancellal.ion of pattadar pass Books does not come in to way ol deciding the title dispute by the competent Civii Court and the revenue records can be changed at any time. The (\ o"u w"..Y'1*"- 1' Poge 9 of 11 sK,t WP No.43770 of 2018 respondent No.2 without proper application of mind and without taking into account of the contentions raised by the petitioners herein dis'missed revision petition 1n E3l94ll2OL8 on I4.O9.2O18. The respondent No.2 being Quashi-Judicial authority, by taking into account of the contentions raised by the petitioners has to pass appropriate orders on facts and law. In the instant case, the petitioners herein, relying on various Judgments of this Court, raised contention about the maintainability of the appeal hled by the unofhcial respondents before the respondent No.3, but the respondent No.3 without considering the said contention allowed the appeal hled by the unofficiai respondents and cancelled the pattadar pass books and title deeds issued in favour of the petitioners and the respondent No.2 also without considering the said aspect dismissed the Paqe 10 oJ 17 sK,l wP No.43770 ol201a revision filed by the petitioners herein conlirming the orders passed by the respondent No.3 and in view of the same, the orders passed by the respor-rdent No.2 and 3 are iiable to be set aside and the respondent No.3 has to reconside'r the appeal hled by the unofhcial respondents and pass approprieLte orders as per law.

7. In view- of the atrove discussions, this writ petition is disposed of brr setting aside the impugned orders by the responder-rt No.2 in Revision Petition No.E3/94112018, datec, 14.O9.2018 and also the order passed by the respondent No.3 in Appeal Rc.No.A/388512013 dal.ed 03.O2.2O18 are hereby set aside and the matte r is remanded back to the respondent No.3 to reconsider the Appeal filed by unofficial respondents and pass appropriate orders as per law, after hearing both sides. Till the disposal : I I l To Poge 17 of 77 5K,J WP No.43770 of 2078 of appeal, both the parties sha-ll maintain status quo existing as on today in respect of subject Iands.

8. Miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending sha1l stand closed //TRUE COPY// SD/-K. S EE RAMA MURTHY PUTY REGI SECTION OFFICER

1. The Secretary, Revenue, Secretariat 9lqt" 9!]:l'"Sana 2. Tne Joint Collector, Warangal (Urban)' warangal . , 3. The Revenue Divisionar6ii;;;, w;;;g"i (Ur5an), Division, warangal 4 The Tahsildar/ Mandal #;;;; offi;"r-' ulnmatonoa Mandal' warangal 5. Two CCs to GP FoR REvil'i[l"Elnigh Court tor the State of Telangana at at Hyderabad' Hvderabad lOUTl PUc] ij'":"#T; dRiCb H eEnnl s I NGH Advocate 5nI66 i" sHi ri rtrAouAVA RAo, Advocate (oPUc) Two CD CoPies -[o 6 7 8 SA BS M- r\ THE T4 G 4 JUt 2025 * HIGH COURT DATED:0210712025 ORDER WP.No.43770 ot 2018 DISPOSING OF THE W.P WITHOUT COSTS.