For the sake of convenience the parties herein are referred to, as arrayed in W.P.No.4593 of 2012. The 1st petitioner alone filed W.P.No.884 of 2011, with a prayer to declare the action of the Tahsildar, Kandukur, the 3rd respondent, in interfering with his possession and enjoyment of Ac.1.12 cents of land in Sy.No.91/IC of Kandukur Village and Mandal, Prakasam District, without initiating any proceedings as illegal, arbitrary and unconstitutional. He pleaded that the land was owned by one, Sri Dama Kondaiah (3rd petitioner), and the latter executed a gift settlement deed dated 23-08-2008, settling Ac.1.12 cents of land in Sy.No.91/IC of Kandukur, and another extent of 50 cents in Sy.No.83/5 of the same Village in favour of his daughter by name, Kondamuri Radha (2nd petitioner). She, in turn, is said to have sold the land of Ac.1.12 cents to the 1st petitioner through sale deed dated 27-01-2010.

The 1st petitioner came to know that the 3rd respondent submitted a complaint before the Station House Officer, Kandukur, stating that the 3rd petitioner initially sold the land in favour of Indrapal Singh Chandok, Haripreeth Singh Chandok and Jaspal Kaur Chandok, respondents 4 to 6 herein, in the year 1995, through registered sale deed, and despite the same, the 3rd petitioner executed gift deed in favour of his daughter, the 2nd petitioner, and thereafter the land was sold in favour of the 1st petitioner, and that these acts constitute an offence punishable under Section 420 I.P.C. It is stated that the Sub-Inspector of Police, Kandukur Police Station submitted a final report, observing that the land is patta in nature, the Government has no claim whatever in it, and that the dispute between various parties, is civil in nature. Stating that there was no basis or justification for the 3rd respondent to interfere with the possession of the land, the 1st petitioner filed W.P.No.884 of 2011, with the relief mentioned above.

In the counter-affidavit filed in W.P.No.884 of 2011, by the 3rd respondent, it was stated that the entries made in favour of the 2nd petitioner as well as pattadar pass books and title deeds issued in their favour were cancelled by the Joint Collector, Ongole, the 2nd respondent, through order dated 23-01-2012, and in that view of the matter, the 1st petitioner does not have any right over it. Since the petitioners came to know about the proceedings dated 23-01-2012 passed by the 2nd respondent, they filed W.P.No.4593 of 2012, with a prayer to quash the same as untenable and contrary to the provisions of A.P. Rights in Land and Pattadar Pass Books Act, 1971 (for short ‘the Act’). They have also prayed for the consequential reliefs.

The petitioners submit that the respondents 4 to 6 approached the 3rd petitioner and his relatives in the year 1995, to purchase the land to establish a milk chilling unit at Kandukur, and to enable them to submit application, a sale deed was executed on 11-10-1995, in respect of the land in Sy.No.91/1C, admeasuring Ac.1.12 cents. It is stated that the sale deed was nominal, and the respondents 4 to 6 did not turn up, even for more than 1 ½ decades, so much so, they did not even take the original sale deed. The Office of Sub-Registrar, Kandukur is said to have destroyed the sale deed in accordance with the relevant Rules. According to the petitioners, the title in respect of the land remained with the 3rd petitioner, and he exercised the right of ownership by donating the same to his daughter, the 2nd petitioner, through gift settlement deed dated 23-08-2008.

The petitioners further submit that if at all anybody felt aggrieved by the issuance of pattadar pass books and title deeds in favour of the 2nd petitioner, based upon the gift settlement deed, he or they ought to have filed an appeal under Section 5(5) of the Act, and that the 3rd respondent acted in a malicious, capricious and arbitrary manner in submitting proposals for cancellation of pattadar pass books and title deeds.