Jurisdiction of revenue authorities is limited to statutory procedures; unauthorized actions based on invalid orders do not confer legal rights over property.

ORDER :

N.TUKARAMJI, J.

Considering that the issues involved in all these Writ Petitions are identical and interrelated, they are being adjudicated through this common order.

2. I have heard Mr. N. Naveen Kumar, learned Counsel for the petitioners, and Mr. B. Chandrasen Reddy, learned Senior Counsel for the respondents.

3. W.P. No. 31169 of 2017 has been filed seeking a declaration that the impugned order in File No. C/4066/2016 dated 09.05.2017, passed by the Revenue Divisional Officer, Chevella Division (respondent No. 2), is arbitrary, illegal, and violative of the mandatory procedure prescribed under the Telangana Rights in Land and Pattadar Passbooks Act, 1971(hereinafter “the Act”). The petitioners further seek a direction to the respondents not to interfere with their peaceful possession of the land in Sy. No. 105/12/E, admeasuring Ac. 2.20 guntas, situated at Nagireddiguda Village, Moinabad Mandal (hereinafter “the subject property”).

4. W.P. No. 26475 of 2019 has been filed seeking to declare the impugned orders in File Nos. B/2388, B/2389, B/2390, and B/2391 dated 23.01.2019, issued by the Tahsildar, Moinabad Mandal (respondent No. 3), mutating the land in Sy. No. 105/12UU 1 to 3, admeasuring Ac. 2.12 guntas, situated at Nagireddiguda Village, Moinabad Mandal, Ranga Reddy District, as illegal and unsustainable.

5. W.P. No. 1203 of 2020 has been filed seeking a direction to the Assistant Commissioner of Police, Rajendranagar, and the Station House Officer, Moinabad Police Station (respondent Nos. 1 and 2), to consider the representation dated 08.01.2020 and provide police aid for implementation of the order of this Court dated 09.11.2019 in I.A. Nos. 1 and 2 of 2019 in W.P. No. 26475 of 2019.

6.1. The case of the petitioners, in brief, is that respondent No. 4 filed O.S. No. 135 of 2003 before the Junior Civil Judge, Vikarabad, seeking a perpetual injunction simpliciter against the petitioners in respect of the subject property. The said suit was dismissed. However, respondent No. 4 preferred an appeal, which was allowed. The petitioners, aggrieved thereby, filed a Second Appeal, wherein an interim direction to maintain status quo was granted.

6.2. Further, respondent Nos. 4 to 6 subsequently instituted O.S. No. 819 of 2017 before the V Additional District and Sessions Judge, Ranga Reddy District, seeking declaration and injunction in respect of the same property. The petitioners contested the said suit. However, as the petitioners failed to adduce evidence due to Advocates abstaining from court proceedings in the relevant period, an ex parte decree was passed on 08.07.2016. Thereafter, an application for setting aside the ex parte decree was filed with a delay of eight days. The said delay was condoned, and the application was allowed, resulting in the restoration of the suit, which is presently pending adjudication.

6.3. In the meantime, during the pendency of the restoration proceedings, respondent Nos. 4 to 6 made a representation seeking incorporation of their names in the revenue records in respect of the subject property based on the ex parte decree in O.S. No. 819 of 2017. Acting upon the said representation, the Revenue Divisional Officer (RDO)/respondent No.2 passed the impugned order dated 09.05.2017, directing the Tahsildar (respondent No. 3) to implement the decree and rectify the relevant revenue entries. Challenging the said order, W.P. No. 31169 of 2017 was filed. This Court granted interim suspension of the impugned order on 14.09.2017, which was subsequently extended until further orders on 13.10.2017.

6.4. Despite the subsistence of the interim suspension, respondent Nos. 4 to 6 executed registered sale deeds in favour of respondent Nos. 8 to 12, selling portions of the subject property and thereby creating third-party interests. The said purchasers were impleaded as respondent Nos. 8 to 12 in W.P. No. 31169 of 2017 vide I.A. No.