The court held that surveys affecting property rights must adhere to principles of natural justice, requiring notifications to all interested parties, particularly in urban properties under the ROR Act.

ORDER :

1. Heard Mr. K. Jamali, learned counsel for the petitioners in W.P. No.25248 of 2024, Mr. S. Lakshmikanth, learned counsel for the petitioners in W.P. No.7982 of 2024 and Mr. N. Manohar, learned counsel for the petitioners in W.P. No.25071 of 2024, Mr. L. Ravinder, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue appearing on behalf of respondent Nos.1 to 3 in W.P. Nos.25248 and 7982 of 2024 and respondent Nos.1 to 3 and 5 in W.P. No.25071 of 2024, Mr. Srinivasa Rao Bodduluri, learned counsel for respondent Nos.6 & 7 in W.P. Nos.25248 of 2024 and 25071 of 2024, Mr. S. Nagesh Reddy, learned counsel for respondent Nos.4 and 5, while Mr. Islamuddin Ansari, learned counsel for respondent Nos.6 and 7 in W.P. No.7982 of 2024.

2. As the lis involved in all these writ petitions is one and the same though the petitioners are different, all these writ petitions were heard together and the same are being disposed of by way of this common order. However, for the sake of convenience, the parties hereinafter are referred to as they are arrayed in W.P. No.25248 of 2024.

3. The petitioners in all these writ petitions and respondent Nos.6 and 7 in W.P. No.7982 of 2024 are claiming that they are the absolute owners and possessors of their respective plots in Survey Nos.374, 378, 379, 381, 385 and 386, situated at Kanajiguda Hamlet of Alwal Village and Mandal, Medchal - Malkajgiri District. They have purchased the same under different registered sale deeds way back in the years 1989 and 1990. All the plot owners have organized themselves and formed an Association in the name and style of ‘Green Fields Plot Owners Association’.

4. When some unknown persons claimed right, title and interest over the said property under the guise of false ORC, their association preferred an appeal before the Joint Collector, Ranga Reddy District challenging the said ORC. The said appeal was allowed. Challenging the same, the third parties carried the matter to this Court by filing a writ petition vide W.P. No.34970 of 1997. The same was heard and decided along with W.A. No.806 of 1999 remanding the matter back to the Joint Collector, Ranga Reddy District for fresh consideration. The Joint Collector conducted a denovo inquiry in File No.F1/4578/1998, and vide orders, dated 29.04.2002 held that the Inamdars and persons claiming through the Inamdars and protected tenants were never in possession of the subject lands as on 01.07.1973 and accordingly set aside the said ORCs issued vide proceedings No.L/4062/1993 and L/4063/1993.

5. The said order dated 29.04.2002 was challenged by the third parties by way of filing writ petitions vide W.P. Nos.11777, 14175 and 18107 of 2002, 23732 of 2003 and C.R.P. No.4830 of 2003. Vide order dated 29.12.2005, this Court dismissed the said writ petitions upholding the order dated 29.04.2002. The petitioner, Mr. P. Dayanand, in W.P. No.14175 of 2002 carried the matter before the Hon’ble Supreme Court vide S.L.P. (Civil) No.2963 of 2006, which was also dismissed on17.04.2006. He filed a review petition vide R.P. (C) No.972 of 2006 and the same was also dismissed on 08.11.2006. Thereafter, he filed Curative Petition (C) No.103 of 2007 in the said review petition and the same was also dismissed.

6. Even the petitioner in W.P. No.11777 of 2002 filed SLP vide SLP (C) No.8754 of 2006 challenging the common order dated 29.12.2005 and the same was also dismissed on 03.07.2006.

7. During the said inter