MADDINA SUBBA RAO Vs. STATE OF TELANGANA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard learned counsel for petitioner, learned Government Pleader for respondents 1 to 4 and Sri P Giri Krishna learned counsel appearing for 5th respondent.

(2.) Petitioner claims that 5th respondent executed simple sale deed dated 10.10.1990 for land to an extent of Ac.9.00 guntas in Survey No.1321AA (Ac.0.14), 1322 (Ac.2.26), 1323 (Ac.5.37) and 1326 (Ac.0.03) of Garripalli village shivar. Relying on the simple sale deed, petitioner, applied for validation under Section 5-A and mutation of his name in the revenue records and his claim was accepted and Tahsildar passed orders on 25.4.2008 to that effect. Challenging the said decision, 5th respondent preferred appeal under Section 5-B of the A.P. Rights in Land and Pattedar Pass Books Act, 1971 contending that she was not aware of the proceedings initiated by petitioner and that without notice or opportunity, based on illegal documents, order dated 25.4.2008 was passed validating the sada sale deed. The prayer of 5th respondent was not accepted and appeal was dismissed by order dated 14.3.2013. Aggrieved thereby, 5th respondent preferred revision under Section 9 of the Act, 1971 before the Joint Collector. By order dated 3.8.2013 the matter was remanded to the Appellate Authority with a direction to dispose of the appeal within two months. On remand, Appellate Authority passed orders on 1.2.2014 disposing the appeal by confirming the validation of subject lands in favour of writ petitioner. Aggrieved thereby, 5th respondent herein preferred revision before the Joint Collector. The Joint Collector, vide orders dated 19.10.2019 reversed the decision of the Tahsildar as upheld by Revenue Divisional Officer and allowed the revision. Questioning the same, this writ petition is filed.

(3.) According to learned counsel for petitioner, based on unregistered sale deed and by relying on provision in Section 5-B of the Act, 1971, petitioner applied for validating the sada sale deed and upon following the due procedure prescribed, orders are passed validating the sada sale deed. According to learned counsel, notices were taken out to the known address of the 5th respondent in the village and as there was no one present in the address given in village, and therefore, notice was displayed in the Gram Panchayat office and there after final orders are passed. He would further submit that there is no illegality committed by the Tahsildar and by following the due procedure only Tahsildar has validated the unregistered sale deed. That after long lapse of time, 5th respondent could not have filed appeal merely claiming that she is not residing in the village and residing at Hyderabad and that cannot be a ground for the Joint Collector to reverse the decision taken by the competent authority made in valid exercise of power in the year 2008. He points out that the Joint Collector made certain observations on merits of the matter, which would deprive the petitioner to agitate his rights and even otherwise, Joint Collector could not have made such observations and at the most Joint Collector could have remanded the matter to the Tahsildar.