THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE K.SARATH WRIT PETITION No.43770 of 2018

ORDER:

Heard Sri R.Dheeraj Singh, learned Counsel for the petitioners, Mrs.S.Sravanthi, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue and Sri D.Madhava Rao, learned Counsel for the respondent Nos.5 to 8.

2. The learned Counsel for the petitioner would submit that, the petitioner Nos.1 and 2 are the owners and possessors of land admeasuring to an extent of Ac.0.16 guntas each in Sy.No.840/B/F/1, situated at Waddepally Revenue Village, Hanmakonda Mandal, Warangal District (hereinafter referred to as ‘subject lands’) having acquired from their ancestors. In the year 2010, upon the application made by the petitioners, the respondent No.4 after thorough enquiry issued Pattadar Pass Books and title deeds to the petitioners vide Proc.RC No.D2/3387/2010 in respect of the subject lands. While it being so, when the respondent Nos.5 to 8 who are strangers, tried to interfere with the possession of the petitioners over the subject lands, the petitioners filed O.S.No.187 of 2013 on the file of V-Additional Junior Civil Judge, Warangal for permanent injunction, in which the petitioners have obtained temporary injunction in I.A.No.202 of 2013. Having received notices in the said I.A., the respondent Nos.5 to 8, suppressing the material facts, filed Appeal under Section 5-B of ROR Act before the respondent No.3 seeking cancellation of Pattadar Pass Books issued by the respondent No.4 vide RC No.A/3885/2013. The petitioners herein filed counter in the said Appeal stating about civil disputes between the parties as well as pendency of O.S.No.187 of 2013. The petitioners have also taken plea that the respondent No.3 has no jurisdiction to entertain appeal. However, the respondent No.3 without considering the contentions raised by the petitioners, erroneously allowed the appeal. Aggrieved by the orders passed by the respondent No.3, the petitioners filed Revision before the respondent No.2 vide Revision Petition No.E3/941/2018 and said revision was dismissed confirming the orders passed by the respondent No.3. Aggrieved by the same, the present writ petition is filed.

3. The learned Counsel for the petitioners submits that the respondent Nos.2 and 3 treating the suit filed by the petitioners as title dispute, allowed the appeal and rejected the revision filed by the petitioners. In fact the petitioners filed injunction suit against the unofficial respondents in O.S.No.187 of 2013 on the file of V Additional Junior Civil Judge, Warangal. The respondents 2 and 3 without considering the contention of the petitioners about the maintainability of the appeal filed by the respondent Nos.5 to 8 and also contrary to the various Judgments of this Court, the respondent No.3 allowed the appeal and cancelled the pattadar pass books and title deeds issued in favour of the petitioners on the ground that the petitioners have not produced orders in I.A.No.202 of 2013 in O.S.No.187 of 2013 dated 06.03.2013 and allowed the appeal treating the dispute between the petitioners and the unofficial respondents as title dispute and cancelled the pattadar pass books and title deeds issued in favour of the petitioners in respect of the subject lands.

4. The learned Counsel for the petitioners further submits that the respondent No.2 without considering the contention raised by the petitioners in the revision petition and also the Judgments relied on by the petitioners herein, merely basing on the orders passed by the respondent No.3 given a finding that cancellation of pattadar pass books does not come into way of deciding the title dispute by the competent civil Court and the revenue records can be changed at any time basing on the order of the competent Civil Court and the respondent No.2 has passed a cryptic orders and the same is liable to be set aside and requested to allow the Writ Petition.

5. The learned Counsel for the unofficial respondents basing on the counter filed by the respondent Nos.5 to 8 wou