( 1 ) THIS application arises out of an order dated 15-11-1997 passed by the Joint collector, Mahaboobnagar in Case no. B7/17/94 whereby and whereunder an appeal filed by the respondent herein was allowed setting aside the order passed by the Revenue Divisional Officer, mahboobnagar conferring ownership right in respect of the suit land on the petitioners under Section 38-E of the Andhra Pradesh (Telangana Area) Tenancy and Agricultural lands Act, 1950 holding that the suit lands in question had actually vested in the State under Sec. 11 of the Andhra Pradesh Land reforms (Ceiling on Agricultural Holdings) act, 1973.

( 2 ) THE petitioners are protected tenants in terms of the provisions of the Tenancy act. One Pradeep Reddy is said to be the original pattedar. He being a surplus landholder, the question whether he held lands in excess than the prescribed ceiling area in terms of" the Act, 1973 came up for consideration. He had surrendered the said lands in question. The respondent s contention was that by reason of such surrender, the lands vested absolutely in the State free from all encumbrances. Assuming that the petitioners are the protected tenants, the contention of the respondent herein was that having regard to such surrender their right stands extinguished. It was further held that the revenue authority had no power of review.

( 3 ) THE questions raised in this application are covered by two decisions of this Court. Section 13 of the A. P. Land reforms (Ceiling on Agricultural Holdings) act, 1973, reads thus:"special provision for protected tenants: (1) Where the holding of any owner includes any land held by a protected tenant, the Tribunal shall, in the first instance, determine whether such land or part thereof stands transferred to the protected tenant under Section 38-E of Andhra Pradesh (Telangana Area) Tenancy and agricultural Land Act, 1950, and if so, the extent of land so transferred; and such extent of land shall thereupon be excluded from the holding of such owner and included in the holding of such tenant, as if the tenant was the owner of such land for the purpose of this Act. (2) Subject to the provisions of subsection (1), the relevant provisions of this Act aforesaid shall apply in the matter of such land by such protected tenant. "

( 4 ) THE said Act was enacted with a view to give effect to the Directive Principles specified in clauses (b) and (c) of Article 39 of the Constitution of India: Section 13 of the said Act, which is a beneficial provision for the protected tenants, clearly states as to how and in what manner the Tribunal shall proceed with determination of ceiling area and the land held by a protected tenant. In the instant case, it is admitted that a certificate under Section 38-E of the A. P. (Telangana Area) Tenancy and Agricultural lands Act had been issued.

( 5 ) IN Laxmaiah vs. Spl. Tahsildar, L. R. T. , east Hyderabad1, Madhava Reddy, J. , as his lordship then was, having regard to the provisions of the said Act held:"but assuming that such tenancy constitutes an encumbrance, it would be seen that Section 10 (5) does not totally prohibit the Tribunal from accepting the surrender of a land encumbered. It only declares that "it should be open to the Tribunal to refuse to accept the surrender of any land, the surrender of which is not acceptable on account of encumbrance of the land". In other words, in certain circumstances surrender of land in the possession of a protected tenant could also be accepted. Under the definition contained in Section 2 (1) of the Act lands in the possession of a protected tenant also would be deemed to be held by the tenant and in computing the holding of a person, the lands which are actually in his possession and enjoyment as a tenant also have to be included if in the case of a partnership, person his entire holding comprises of land held by him as a tenant and such holding is in excess of the ceiling area to which he is entitled, then ob