1. This writ petition, under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, is filed by the petitioner requesting to grant a Writ in the nature of Certiorari and set aside the order, dated 16.06.2015, in Rc.No.E5/482/2014 passed by the Joint Collector, Warangal - 2nd respondent after calling for records related to the said case. By the said orders, the Joint Collector confirmed the order, dated 07.12.2013, of the 3rd respondent – Revenue Divisional Officer, Warangal, in file in Rc.No.A/8112/2012.

2. I have heard the submissions of Sri K.S. Murthy, learned counsel appearing for the writ petitioner, of the learned Government Pleader for Revenue (TG), appearing for the respondents 1 to 4, and of Sri P.S.P. Suresh Kumar, learned counsel appearing for the respondents 5 to 14. I have perused the material record.

3. This Court, on 22.04.2016, while admitting the writ petition, granted the following interim order in WPMP.No.17194 of 2016:

‘Pending further orders, status quo in all respects, including with reference to the nature of land and alienation in any manner, shall be maintained by either party.’

4. Requesting to vacate the afore-said interim order, the unofficial respondents 5 to 14 filed WVMP.No.3966 of 2016.

5. However, when the vacate petition was taken up for hearing, a joint request was made by the learned counsel for both the sides that instead of the vacate petition, the writ petition may be heard and disposed of.

6. The case of the petitioner and the submissions made on her behalf, in brief, are as follows:

The petitioner’s father is the absolute owner and possessor of the agricultural dry lands of a total extent of Ac.30.12 guntas, (that is Ac.8.32 guntas in Sy.no.689, Ac.6.31 guntas in Sy.no.699, Ac.10.38 guntas in Sy.No.701 and Ac.3.31 guntas in Sy.no.704) situated at Ananthasagar village, Hasanparthy Mandal of Warangal District. The petitioner’s father sold away the said entire land to Mohammed Ali, S/o. Mahaboob Ali, under a simple unregistered agreement of sale on 10.01.1968. The said lands were excluded from the lands owned by the petitioner’s father. However, Md.Ali could not get the lands mutated in his name in the revenue records as pattadar. His name was shown as occupant in respect of Ac.17.29 guntas out of the lands in Sy.nos.699 and 701 for five years only, that is, 1971-72, 1972-73, 1978-79, 1979-80 and 1980- 81. In the year 1981, the said Md.Ali sold away the entire land aggregating to Ac.30.12 guntas to the father of the petitioner citing urgent personal needs, for valid consideration and by executing a simple sale deed on 15.03.1981 in the presence of witnesses and the name of the father of the petitioner is recorded in revenue records including pahanies from the year 1981 onwards as pattedar and enjoyer till January, 2006. The said sale deed was impounded by the 2nd respondent after thorough enquiry vide order, dated 22.08.2007, in D.Dis.No.B/1823/2007. The said sale deed executed by Md.Ali in favour of the father of the petitioner in respect of the said land is a genuine and valid document. The petitioner’s father gifted Ac.17.29 guntas out of the said total extent of land to the petitioner at the time of her marriage and delivered vacant possession thereof and executed a registered gift settlement deed, on 30.10.2006, bearing document no.216/2006. The RDO – 3rd respondent mutated the gifted property in the name of the petitioner and her name appears in respect of the said property in all revenue records concerned including pahanies. The said mutation was affected vide memo in Rc.No.B1/662/2006, dated 22.03.2006. The petitioner was also issued pattadar passbook and title deed document as per procedure under A.P. Rights in Lands and Pattedar Pass Book Act, 1971 [‘the Act’, for short]. Since the date of the said gift, the petitioner is in peaceful possession and enjoyment of the said extent of Ac.17