1. The order dated 31.01.2019 passed by the Revenue Divisional Officer, Nirmal Division, Nirmal District, in exercise of appellate power under Section 5-B of the Telangana Rights in Land and Pattadar Pass Books Act, 1971 (for brevity, ‘the Act of 1971’), is presently called in question. The petitioner was the second respondent in the said appeal, filed by respondent 4 herein.

2. By order dated 27.02.2019 passed in this writ petition, status quo obtaining as on that date was directed to be maintained in relation to entries in the revenue records.

3. Heard Sri C.Naresh Reddy, learned counsel for the petitioner, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue for respondents 1 to 3, and Sri K.Jaya Kumar, learned counsel appearing for Sri Md.Sultan Basha, learned counsel on caveat for respondent 4. Respondent 5 sails with the petitioner and is therefore a proforma party.

4. The petitioner claims to be the absolute owner and possessor of the land admeasuring Ac.0.30 guntas in Sy.No.70/3 of Shakari Village, Soan Mandal, Nirmal District. He purchased the said land under registered sale deed dated 07.03.2006, bearing Document No.732/2006, from respondent 5 herein, the first respondent in the appeal before the Revenue Divisional Officer, Nirmal Division, Nirmal District. According to the petitioner, respondent inherited the subject land from his father and sold it to respondent 5 under unregistered sale deed dated 11.02.1991. Thereupon, respondent 5 applied for regularization and validation of the said unregistered sale deed under Section 5-A of the Act of 1971. The Tahsildar, Soan Mandal, Nirmal District, followed the due procedure and 4 validated the said unregistered sale deed dated 11.02.1991 by collecting the requisite stamp duty and registration charges and issued a certificate in Form XIII(B) on 25.08.1993. Basing on this validation, the name of respondent 5 was mutated in the revenue records and she was issued a pattadar pass book and title deed. After making due enquiries with the revenue authorities, the petitioner purchased the subject land from respondent 5 under the registered sale deed dated 07.03.2006. His name was also mutated in the revenue records and he was issued a pattadar pass book and title deed.

5. While so, in the year 2008, respondent 4 approached the Revenue Divisional Officer, Nirmal Division, by way of an application, seeking rectification of the revenue records. The same was taken on file as Case No.B/1075/2008, but the Revenue Divisional Officer, Nirmal Division, vide Memo dated 14.11.2008, directed respondent 4 to seek redressal in the competent civil Court. As respondent 4 was interfering with his possession over the subject land, the petitioner along with respondent 5, his vendor, filed O.S.No.69 of 2008 before the learned Junior Civil Judge, Nirmal, seeking declaration of title and a perpetual injunction against respondent 4. During the pendency of the suit, elders intervened and respondent 4 promised before them that he would not interfere with the subject land as he had no claim over the same. In the light of this compromise, the petitioner claims that he did not pursue the suit and O.S.No.69 of 2008 came to be dismissed for default on 25.02.2013.

6. At this stage, respondent 4 again approached the Revenue Divisional Officer, Nirmal Division, by way of representation dated 21.12.2017, praying that she should cancel the entries made in favour of respondent in the revenue records and restore his name therein. Treating this representation as an appeal under Section 5-B of the Act of 5 1971, the Revenue Divisional Officer issued notices to the petitioner and respondent 5. Despite the petitioner contesting the claims put forth by respondent 4 and also raising the issue of maintainability of the appeal on the ground of delay & laches and the appeal not being in accordance with the procedure laid down in the Act of 1971, the Revenue Divisional Officer, Nirmal Division, allowed the appeal, vide the or