KHAJA MOINUDDIN AND ANOTHER Vs. STATE OF TELANAGANA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The order dated 24.11.2018 passed by the 2nd respondent-Joint Collector, Medak District, in F3/967/2017, is challenged before this Court. Vide the impugned order, the 2nd respondent, in exercise of revision jurisdiction under Section 9 of the A.P Rights in Land and Pattadar Passbooks Act, has set aside the order of the 3rd respondent-appellate authority; thereby restored the order passed by the 4th respondent-Tahsildar.

(2.) It is the claim of petitioners that they are the original owners and pattadars of land admeasuring Ac.15-00 guntas in Survey No.250, and Ac.3-00 guntas in Survey No.252 of Ramanthapur Village, Yeldurthy Mandal, Medak District; and that the respondents have illegally obtained mutation of their names in the records by fraudulent means basing on invalid documents. Making such a claim, the petitioners approached the 4th respondentTahsildar/primary authority seeking correction in entries in revenue records; however, the same came to be refused. On appeal by the petitioners, the 3rd respondent-Revenue Divisional Officer/appellate authority, after issuing notice and conducting enquiry, allowed the appeal and also directed the Tahsildar to effect mutation in favour of the petitioners and their sons. Aggrieved by the order of the Revenue Divisional Officer, the respondents filed a revision petition before the 2nd respondent-Joint Collector/revision authority. The 2nd respondent-Joint Collector, exercising powers under Section 9 of the Act, allowed the revision, by setting aside the order of the appellate authority and reviving the order passed by the Tahsildar, thus, the names of the revision petitioner came to be restored in the revenue records.

(3.) Aggrieved by the order of the 2nd respondent-Joint Collector, this writ petition is filed by the petitioners before the appellate authority-Revenue Divisional Officer.