ORDER:

(Per Hon’ble Sri Justice N. Tukaramji)

By this writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the writ petitioners are seeking issuance of writ in the nature of Certiorari to set aside/quash the Lok Adalat Award dated 06.02.2013 passed in O.S.No.1134 of 2012 on the file of the I Additional District Judge, Ranga Reddy District.

2. We have heard Mr. Kuriti Bhaskara Rao, learned counsel for the petitioners, Mr. C.V. Mohan Reddy, learned counsel for the respondents 1 to 3, Mr.Shashikiran Pusluri, learned Standing Counsel for Telangana State Legal Services Authority/respondent No.4 and Mr. K. Muralidhar Reddy, learned Government Pleader for Revenue/respondents 5 and 6.

3. Succinctly the relevant facts in brief are that ,the respondent No.1 as plaintiff filed suit O.S.No.1134 of 2012 against his sister and brother/respondent Nos.2 and 3 seeking partition of suit schedule properties wherein among the other properties in ‘B’ schedule Sy.No.333 of an extent of Ac.1.14 guntas situated at Vattinagulapalli village, Rajendrangar mandal, Chevellak Division, Ranga Reddy District (for short, ‘the subject land’) has been shown. Subsequently the suit was referred to Lok Adalat and on 06.02.2013 award has been passed in terms of settlement between the parties allotting the entire ‘B’ schedule property to the 2nd defendant therein i.e., respondent No.2. The petitioners were neither parties to the suit nor the Lok Adalat proceedings. Nonetheless, contending that the award is grossly prejudicing their rights and interests over the subject land and the award was obtained behind their back in fraudulent and collusive manner, preferred this writ petition with a prayer to set aside/quash the same.

4. Learned counsel for the writ petitioners (for short, ‘the petitioners’) would submit that originally Sri Rameswara Prasad Dubey was the pattadar (landlord) of the subject land and other extents. When the landlord wanted to dispose of the lands the predecessor in interest of the petitioners i.e. Sri Dokuru Narsimha Reddy and Sri Goda Balaiah who were protected tenants under Andhra Pradesh (Telangana Area) Tenancy Agricultural Land Act, 1950 (for short, ‘the Act’) entered into settlement, whereby they relinquished their protected tenancy rights and in exchange the landlord gave consent for mutation of their names as pattadars of subject land. Thereupon, the then Tahsildar and the District Collector issued certificate on 31.05.1975 under Section 38-E of the Act which is equivalent to title deed.

5. While so, in 1994 the landlord fraudulently entered into sale transaction in regard to subject land with one Mrs. B. Kamalamma/mother of respondent Nos.1 to 3 and executed a registered sale deed, though the subject land was alienated under Section 38-E of the Act.

6. On interference of the possession by the vendees under registered sale deed, the petitioners got knowledge of the fraudulent transfer and the effort of the vendees for mutation in revenue record. On rising objection, the mutation proceedings before the authorities, kept in abeyance. The petitioners also obtained certified copy certificate under Section 38-E of the Act from the concerned Revenue Divisional Officer on 07.04.2015.

7. In 2019 as the children of vendee had interfered with the possession claiming that their mother had purchased the subject land, the petitioners got filed suit O.S.No.831/2019 on the file of the II Additional District Judge, Ranga Reddy seeking cancellation of the sale deed and to declare their title, wherein on filing of written statement by the respondent Nos.1 to 3 as defendants the petitioners were informed about the suit O.S.No.1134 of 2012 filed among themselves for partition and passing of the impugned Lok Adalat award.

8. It has been asserted that, the petitioners being successors of original protected tenants and holding certificate under Section 38-E of the Act either the original owner/landlord or the purchaser or the vendee would not acquire any rig