ORDER :

This writ petition is filed seeking Writ of Certiorari by calling for the records relating to the judgment passed by respondent No.2 in O.S.No.A4/CPC/959/2020, dated 24.12.2022 in granting permanent injunction in favour of respondent No.4 restraining the petitioner, his agents and servants from interfering with the peaceful possession and enjoyment of the respondent No.4 over the land to an extent of 1925 Sq.fts i.e. Ac. 1.76 gts (35' x 55') in Sy No. 22/3, situated at Utnoor Village and Mandal, Adilabad District, without conducting proper trial as required under C.P.C and without even deciding the pecuniary jurisdiction, in spite of the direction of this Hon'ble Court in W.P.No.2996 of 2021, dated 19.02.2021, even though the respondent No.2 himself issued the Form-L earlier in respect of the land in Sy.No.22/2 and basing on which the sale deed was registered on 18.08.2011 in favour the petitioner and without having jurisdiction and set aside the judgment passed by the 2nd respondent in O.S.No.A4/CPC/959/2020, dated 24.12.2022 by declaring the same as illegal, arbitrary, abuse of process of law, violation of principles of natural justice and contrary to the rules.

2. Heard Sri S. Surender Reddy, learned counsel for the petitioner, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Social Welfare appearing for respondent Nos.1 to 3 and Sri Nazeer Khan, learned counsel for respondent No.4.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner had purchased the land to an extent of Ac.0.05 gts in Sy.No.22/2, situated at Utnoor Village and Mandal, Adilabad District from Mohammed Toufiquddin on 19.05.2011 through ordinary sale deed and the vendor of the petitioner is a non-tribal and the petitioner belongs to Schedule Tribe and the subject land is situated in Scheduled/Agency Area.

3.1 He further submits that after following the procedure and after issuance of Form-L by the respondent No.2, the Joint Sub-Registrar-I, Adilabad, registered the sale deed on 18.08.2011 vide document No.6157/2011 pursuant to the ordinary sale deed dated 19.05.2011 and the revenue authorities have issued pattadar pass book in favour of the petitioner.

3.2 He also submits that respondent No.4 filed a suit A4/CPC/959/2020 seeking Perpetual Injunction on the file of respondent No.2 against the petitioner alleging that she purchased the land to an extent of 1925 sq. fts in Sy.No.22/3, situated at Utnoor Village and Mandal, Adilabad District from one Durdana Begum through registered sale deed vide document No.5538 of 2020, dated 21.07.2020 though there is no land in Sy.No.22/3. In the said suit, the petitioner filed written statement denying the plaint allegations and specifically contending that the suit filed by the respondent No.4 before the respondent No.2 is not maintainable under law on the ground of pecuniary jurisdiction. The respondent No.4 has mentioned in the plaint that the notional value of the suit is Rs.5,000/- and basing upon the said value the Sub-Divisional Magistrate/Revenue Divisional Officer, only has got the jurisdiction to try the said suit, but not respondent No.2. He further submits that as per the provision of Rule 7 of Telangana State Agency Rules, 1924” hereinafter called as ‘Rules’ for brevity, if the value of the suit exceeds Rs.5,000/- only, the respondent No.2 has got the jurisdiction to entertain the suit. Hence, the suit filed by the respondent No.4 before the respondent No.2 is not maintainable.

3.3 He further contended that the respondent No.2 without following the mandatory procedure prescribed under the Agency Rules and the provisions of C.P.C., without framing issues, without conducting trial and making documents through the witnesses as envisaged under law, passed the impugned Decree and Judgment on 16.01.2021. He also contended that the petitioner earlier filed W.P. No.2996 of 2021 before this Court questioning the orders passed by the respondent No.2 in granting Permanent Injunction on 16.01.2021, and the same was