ORDER:

Heard Mr. Lalitha Kamesh, learned counsel representing Mr. J.

Raghuram, learned counsel for the petitioner, learned Government Pleader for Revenue appearing on behalf of respondent Nos.1 to 4 and Mr. K.V. Sudhakar, learned counsel for respondent Nos.5 and 6. 2. This writ petition is filed challenging the order of respondent No.2 vide Proc.No.E3/1035-14/2021, dated 17.06.2022 for denial of restoration of name of the petitioner in Dharani Portal as well as connected revenue records even after setting aside the illegal pattas of respondent Nos.5 and 6 in Survey No.628 to an extent of Acs.7.05 guntas, situated at Phanigiri Village, Nagaram Mandal, Suryapet District, assigning reasons pending of civil suit filed by respondent Nos.5 and 6 vide O.S. No.97 of 2019 on the file of Senior Civil Judge, Suryapet, as illegal and against the provisions of Section - 8 (2) of the Old ROR Act, and for a consequential direction to respondent No.2 to restore the name of the petitioner for the land in Survey No.628 to an extent of Acs.7.05 guntas instead of Acs.5.05 guntas.

3. CASE OF THE PETITIONER:

i) The petitioner herein is the absolute owner and possessor of the land to an extent of Acs.14-11 guntas in Survey No.628 of Phanigiri Village, Nagaram Mandal, Suryapet District, on par with his elder brother, late Jangili Dathaiah. The said property is ancestral property.

ii) The name of the father of the petitioner was recorded as pattadar and possessor in Khasra Pahani for the year 1954-55 and also Sethwar. Pattadar Pass Book and Title Deed were also obtained. iii) Mr. Jangili Dathaiah, the elder brother of the petitioner, during his life time, sold the land admeasuring Acs.4.00 guntas out of Acs.7.06 guntas to Mr. Akula Venkanna and Mrs. Mangamma, leaving balance of land to an extent of Acs.3.06 guntas. Mutation proceedings vide B/683/2009, dated 12.01.2008 were also issued. In the revenue records, the names of his two sons i.e., Mr. Jangili Simhaiah and Mr. Laxmi Narayana were recorded in respect of the balance land admeasuring Acs.3.06 guntas vide proceedings No.B/267/2019, dated 07.06.2019.

iv) Taking advantage of the petitioner’s illness, the father of respondent Nos.5 and 6 have executed two (02) registered Gift Settlement Deeds bearing Nos.5254 of 1992 and 5255 of 1992, both dated 02.11.1992. In fact, the father of respondent Nos.5 and 6 has no title over the aforesaid land. He has obtained pattadar pass books in respect of the subject land in collusion with the Revenue Authorities. Therefore, the petitioner herein had filed an appeal under Section - 5B of the Telangana Rights in Land and Pattadar Pass Books Act, 1971 (for short ‘ROR Act, 1971’) challenging the aforesaid mutation proceedings and pattadar pass books issued in favour of respondent Nos.5 and 6. The said appeal was allowed setting aside the mutation proceedings granted in favour of respondent Nos.5 and 6 and directed to restore the petitioner’s name. Even then, respondent No.2 did not restore the name of the petitioner in respect of the aforesaid land in Survey No.628 of Phanigiri Village.

v) Though there is no order from any Court prohibiting respondent No.2 from entering the name of the petitioner in respect of the aforesaid land, respondent No.2 is not accepting the request made by the petitioner to enter his name.

vi) A suit vide O.S. No.97 of 2019 filed by respondent Nos.5 and 6 against the petitioner herein and respondent Nos.2 to 4 herein for declaration of title, perpetual injunction and rectification of wrong entries in revenue records, is pending before the Senior Civil Judge at Suryapet. The petitioner herein had filed I.A. No.219 of 2020 under Order - VII, Rule - 11 (d) of the CPC, to reject the plaint in the said suit. The said I.A. was dismissed on 07.12.2021. Assailing the said order, the petitioner herein has filed a revision vide C.R.P. No.2108 of 2021 and the same was also dismissed vide order dated 20.07.2022. According to the learned counsel, the petitioner h