IMPORTANT POINT
The Revenue Authorities cannot adjudicate complicated questions of title and ownership, which must be resolved by a Civil Court.

ORDER :

1. Heard Mr. Ramakrishna Reddy Malyala, learned counsel for the petitioners, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue appearing on behalf of respondent Nos. 1 to 4 and Mr. N. Kodandarama Rao, learned counsel for respondent No. 5.

2. This writ petition is filed by the petitioners seeking writ of certiorari to call for records from the office of respondent No. 2 in Revision Petition Case No. ST/D1/291/2021 Case No. D1/82/2014, wherein and whereby respondent No. 2-Special Tribunal allowed the petition vide impugned order dated 29.06.2021 restoring the name of respondent No. 5 over the land in Survey No. 85/A and 85/AA to an extent of Acs. 5.27 guntas, situated at Marepally Village of Thimmajipet Mandal, Nagarkurnool District and to set aside the same.

3. The case of the petitioners is as under:

(i) Originally the land bearing Survey No. 85, admeasuring Acs. 9.33 guntas belongs to Mr. Paspula Narsaiah. On his death, the said land was mutated in the name of Mr. Pasupula Ramaiah @ Ramulu in Khasra Pahani. Subsequently, in Chesala pahani for the years 1955-56, 1956-57 and 1957-58, the said land was divided between Mr. Pasupula Ramaiah and Mr. Pasupula Kondaiah at Acs. 4.36 guntas and Acs. 4.37 guntas and accordingly mutated pattas on their names respectively.

(ii) Later on the death of the said Mr. Kondaiah, succession was issued on the names of Mr. Wadde Narsimha, Mr. Wadde Venkataiah and Mr. Wadde Krishnaiah, who are sons of Mr. Wadde Mallaiah, as grandsons, vide proceedings No. 1/18/1996, dated 04.06.1996 allotting Acs. 1.25 guntas each in Survey Nos. 85/A and 85/AA and issued pattadar passbooks and title deeds. Respondent No. 5, his late mother, Mrs. Wadde Ramulamma and his brother, Mr. Wadde Laxmaiah, who said to have died issueless, succeeded their share of land through his father, Mr. Wadde Chennaiah to an extent Acs. 1.25 guntas making total of Acs. 4.37 guntas. On the death of mother and brother, respondent No. 5 succeeded the total land of Acs. 4.36 guntas.

(iii) Respondent No. 5 sold his share of land to Cadala Srisailam and Mr. Dulla Ramaiah vide registered sale deed bearing document Nos. 4215 and 4216 of 2006 for an extent of Acs. 4.04 guntas, wherein the western boundary was shown as land of Mr. Wadde Venkataiah, respondent No. 7 herein, who is none other than one of the Vendors of petitioner No. 1. Thus, respondent No. 5 indirectly admitted and accepted that the Vendors of petitioner No. 1 i.e. respondent Nos. 6, 7 and 8, sons of Mr. Wadde Mallaiah, are the shareholders of respondent No. 5, though he pleaded in his appeal before the Revenue Divisional Officer (RDO), Nagarkurnool that they are no way concerned to his family and left the Village and settled at Marchal Village of Kalwakurthy Mandal in the year 2006 itself. Like-wise, the other shareholders, respondent Nos. 6, 7 and 8 sold their entire land to petitioner No. 1 vide registered sale deed bearing document No. 793 of 2007, dated 06.02.2007. Since then, the respective pattadars are in peaceful possession and enjoyment of the lands having been implemented their respective sale deeds without any dispute vide proceedings No. A/27/2007, dated 28.03.2007, issued pattadar passbook and title deed.

(iv) While the things stood thus, respondent No. 5 preferred an appeal questioning the implementation of respondent Nos. 6, 7 and 8 in ROR in proceedings No. 1/18/1996 of Tahsildar, Thimmajipet dated 04.06.1996 before the RDO, Nagarkurnool, vide file No. K/ROR/80/2007 on the ground that respondent Nos. 6, 7 and 8 are not at all concern to the family of respondent No. 5 and they got mutated their names in ROR using the surname illegally, that too without any notice to him. The said appeal was allowed without any notice to petitioner No. 1 by setting aside the order and remanded the matter back for denovo enquiry to respondent No. 4 on 03.05.2007. On the basis of remand order, respondent No. 4 without any denovo enquiry, restored the name of respondent No. 5 vide proc