A. SATYANARAYANA MURTY Vs. STATE OF TELANGANA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard learned counsel for petitioner and learned standing counsel for respondents.

(2.) Petitioners are challenging the decision of the Joint Collector dated 17.8.2019 made in exercise of revisional jurisdiction under Section 9 of the Telangana Rights in Land & Pattadar Pass Books Act, 1971 (for short the Act,1971). By this order, the Joint Collector entertained the revision filed by Kolluri Krishna/5th respondent herein, challenging the decision of the Revenue Divisional Officer dated 25.11.2017 Tahsildar issued mutation orders in favour of Sri Jalli Krishna and Sri Jalli Jayaram to an extent of Ac.1.18 guntas and Ac.1.00 respectively in survey No.487, Mancherevula village. Aggrieved thereby, petitioners herein preferred appeal before the Revenue Divisional Officer. The Revenue Divisional Officer reversed the decision of the Tahsildar. The 5th respondent who is not a party either before the Tahsildar or before the Revenue Divisional Officer, preferred revision contending that Ac.1.18 guntas and Ac.1.00 in survey No. 487, Mancherevula village has fallen to his share in the family partition out of the land originally owned by Sri Kolluri Anjaian and therefore, the question of mutation of names of other persons and granting relief in favour of petitioners was not valid in law.

(3.) On considering the rival submissions and tracing the history of litigation as well as claims of Sri Kolluri Anjaiah family of alleged purchase made by them from the original pattadar by name Hyder Ali Mirza as early as on 10.10.1955 and subsequent decisions of the revenue authorities and contrary claim of other persons who also claims to have purchased from the same vendor and subsequent transactions, the revisional authority held that decision of the appellate authority where under reversed the decision of the Mandal Revenue Officer holding that the Mandal Revenue Officer in File No. D/2985/2005 and D/54/2008 stated to have issued fraudulently, which is illegal and unsustainable and accordingly partly sets aside the same, granting liberty to the aggrieved parties to avail the civil law remedy.