COMMON ORDER:

W.P. No.18957 of 2020 is filed challenging the family member certificate bearing No.C/492/2019 dated 01.02.2019 issued by respondent No.4 to respondent No.5 as being contrary to the provisions of the Telangana Rights in Land and Pattadar Pass Books Act, 2020 and in violation of Articles 14, 21 and 300A of the Constitution of India, and consequently, to set aside the said family member certificate.

2. W.P.No.17372 of 2021 is filed challenging the action of respondent No.4 in granting succession; mutation of revenue records (Dharani portal and Record of Rights) and issuing pattedar pasbooks in the names of respondent Nos.5 to 9 vide transaction No.2100493874 dated 09.07.2021 and 2100429763 dated 12.07.2021, as being illegal, arbitrary, violative of principles of natural justice and violative of Articles 14, 21 and 300A of the Constitution of India.

3. The case of the petitioner in WP.No.18957 of 2020 is that immediately upon coming to know about issuance of the impugned family member certificate, he submitted objections in the office of respondent No.4 on 02.02.2019. Later, under RTI application, the petitioner was informed on 25.09.2020 about the family member certificate. The petitioner along with other family members, who are the legal heirs of late P. Prathap Reddy, filed a suit in O.S.No.20 of 2020 on the file of XII Additional District Judge, Ranga Reddy District at Vikarabad, for partition in respect of the lands in Sy.No.4/1, 7/Ruu, 8/ee, 8/u, 11, 30, 31, 36, 37, 45, 151/1, 152/1, 152/2, 152/3, 167, 168, 169/aa, 205, 206, 208, 209, 219, 283, 286 and also House No.1-9/2 and House No.1-5 situated at Pamena Village, Chevella Mandal, Ranga Reddy District. 4. It is contended by learned counsel for the petitioners that respondent No.4 did not consider the objections of the petitioner and fraudulently issued family member certificate on 01.02.2019. According to learned counsel for the petitioners, the family member certificate dated 01.02.2019 is ante-dated document. It is contended that the said certificate may be utilised for any purpose and prone to misuse. The certificate itself shows that it is for bank purpose and the petitioners have apprehension that respondent No.5 would siphon away monies belonging to late Mutharagari @ Patlolla Prathap Reddy and his late wife by using the said certificate. The notice issued for filing objections for issuance of family member certificate says that objections can be filed by 31.01.2019. When the notification was received by Panchayat Office on 01.02.2019, the deadline for filing submissions i.e., 31.01.2019 was over.

5. It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioners that respondent No.5 was issued family member certificate dated 01.12.2019 by the Tahsildar, Chevella Mandal, showing him as the adopted son of Muttagari Pratap Reddy and another family member certificate dated 29.01.2020 by the Tahsildar, Balanagar, showing him as the son of Gummala Hanumantha Reddy. As per the report of the Divisional Panchayat Officer (DPO) dated 12.06.2019, Smt. Surekha w/o. G. Jagan Mohan Reddy (respondent No.5) stated that her husband is nephew of Smt. Late Anasuya w/o. P. Prathap Reddy. It is submitted that the respondent No.5 has not submitted any documents in support of his adoption to the DPO. Respondent No.5 was not acknowledged as the adopted son of Patlolla Prathap Reddy in any of his pleadings either in O.S.No.72 of 2017 before XII Additional District Judge, Vikarabad, or in O.S.No.114 of 2008 before the Senior Civil Judge, Chevella. In the Aadhar card issued to respondent No.5, he is described as the son of Gummala Hanmanth Reddy. In several official documents like ration card, ESI Corporation identity card, voter ID card etc., respondent No.5 is described as the son of Gummala Hanmanth Reddy.

6. In W.P.No.17372 of 2021, it is contended by learned counsel for the petitioners that succession/mutation proceedings were issued in favour of respondent No.5 by respondent No.4 – T