GANGUMEHRA Vs. POCHUMEHRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is a revision petition filed under section 91 of the Andhra Pradesh (Telangana Area) Tenancy and Agricultural Lands Act, 1950. The Petitioner is a poor Tribal, who was a protected tenant of the land bearing S.No. 30 measuring Act. 3-19 guntas situate at Pedda Siddapur Village, Sirour taluk. Adilabad District. The ownership certificate under section 38-E of the Andhra Pradesh (Telangana Area) Tenancy & Agricultural Lands Act, 1950, 1550, hereinafter referred to as "the Act" was issued to the petitioner by the Revenue Divisional Officer. Asifabad, in case No C/l919/85 dated 25-1-1932. Against the Order the respondents here in filed an appeal under section 90 of the Act before the Joint Collector, Adilabad. The Joint Collector allowed the appeal and set aside the certificate issued to favour of the petitioner on the ground that the landlords are joint pattedars and they have got only Acs.174-75 cents, which is less than two holdings. As per section 33 (7) (c) of the Act, if a landlord has got less than two family holdings, no certificate can be granted. The Joint Collector allowed the appeal and set aside the certificate issued under section 38-E of the Act in favour of the petitioner herein. Against tbat order the present revision petition is filed.

(2.) The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner raised three contentions.

(3.) The order of the Joint Collector is vitiated because he has not considered the merits and demerits of the case by thoroughly examining the entire record. Therefore, he stated that the revision petition has to be allowed. 3. The learned counsel for the respondents vehemently contended that the notice was served and the Petitioner himself appeared before the Joint Collector. Therefore, there is no invalidity in the process of servics. He further submitted that the Joint Collector himself satisfied after verifying the record about the family holdings of the respondents here in and there is no irregularity or illegality in the Order of the Joint Collector, Therefore, the revision petition has to be dismissed.