ORDER:

1. The present revision is directed against order dated 24.06.2023 in Review Petition No.D/176/2021 in appeal No.F2/IA-09/2017 on the file of the Additional Collector, (Revenue) at Wanaparty District, wherein and whereby the order dated 27.12.2019 in appeal No.F2/IA-09/2017 on the file of the Joint Collector, Wanaparthy, was reviewed and recalled, whereunder, the Joint Collector, Wanaparthy, dismissed the appeal filed by respondent Nos. 3 to 5 herein holding that there was inordinate delay of 22 years in filing the appeal. However, in order dated 24.06.2023 in Review Petition No.D/176/2021, the said order of appeal was reviewed and recalled and appeal was allowed directing the Revenue Divisional Officer concerned to grant Occupancy Rights Certificate (for short ‘ORC’) in favour of respondent Nos. 3 to 5 herein. Aggrieved by the same, the present revision is filed by respondents in the review petition.

2. The background of facts show that originally, one Mangali Kistappa, S/o. Balaiah, was inamdar of choutha inam land to an extent of Ac.11-21 guntas in Sy.No.134 and Ac.14-29 guntas in Sy.No.135 situated at Duppalli Village, Madanapur Mandal (previously, Chinna Chintakunta Mandal) of Wanaparthy District.

The inamdar died on 26.10.1987 and he allegedly executed registered Will deed document bearing No.6/1986 dated 09.04.1986 in favour of his daughter and son-in-law. The daughter of inamdar died on 16.08.1993 and her husband died in the year 2007. Respondent Nos.3 to 5 herein/review petitioners before the Additional Collector (Revenue) at Wanaparthy District, are children of daughter and son-in-law of inamdar. Initially, they filed appeal No.F2/IA-09/2017 before the Joint Collector, Wanaparthy, challenging the ORC proceedings granted in favour of the revision petitioners herein by the Inams Tribunal by order dated 21.02.1991. Respondent Nos.3 to 5, who are appellants before the Joint Collector at Wanaparthy District, filed the appeal on the ground that ORC dated 21.02.1991 was granted to the revision petitioners herein without giving any notice and on knowing the grant of said ORC, they filed the said appeal.

3. Initially, the Joint Collector, Wanaparthy District, by order dated 27.12.2019 in appeal No.F2/IA-09/2017 dismissed the appeal with the following reasons:

“This appeal filed along with delay petition, this court is at the first instance wants to decide on delay petition as there is abnormal delay in filing the appeal i.e., more than two deceades. It is a fact that, the order of Revenue Divisional Officer, Naryanapet was passed on 21-02-1991 in File No.A/31/1991 and issued Occupancy Rights Certificate in favor of father of respondents, in respect of Sy.No.134 to an extent of Ac.4-20 gts., in Sy.No.135 to an extent of Ac.2-11

gts., of Duppaly village.

The delay must be explained by the petitioners/appellants with sufficient cause and with cogent reasons. Since, it is abnormal delay, it cannot be said that, they are not having knowledge of order after lapse of 22 years. They cannot also say that, no notice was served on them. No prudent man can say that, they are not aware of order for more than 22 years, more particularly when the respondents are in possession over the subject matter of land claimed by the petitioners/appellants. In the pahanies also the names of respondents are appearing in the possession column. The petitioners/appellants have not stated a single convincing reason to condone the delay. Simply filling affidavit along with appeal cannot be taken it granted by the petitioners/appellants when the long standing possession of respondents is appearing in the revenue record. It is settled law from the judgments of our honourable Apex court that, the day to day delay must be explained by petitioners and that the delay must be explained with sufficient cause and cogent reasons. But in this particular case, the petitioners/appellants have failed to explain the same with cogent reasons and they have not even explaine