THE HON’BLE THE ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE SUJOY PAUL AND THE HON’BLE SMT JUSTICE RENUKA YARA WRIT APPEAL No.382 of 2025 JUDGMENT: (Per the Hon’ble the Acting Chief Justice Sujoy Paul Sri K. Chaithanya, learned counsel for the appellants; Sri Rapolu Bhaskar, learned counsel for respondent No.1 and Sri Katram Muralidhar Reddy, learned Government Pleader for Revenue, for respondent Nos.2 to 5.

2. The learned Single Judge, while disposing of the instant Writ Petition at paragraph Nos.6 and 7 opined as under:

“6. This writ petition is filed questioning the proceedings vide No.B/187/2022 dated 18.10.2024 passed by respondent No.4 recommending for issuance of supplementary sethwar and for rectification of the entries in the revenue records. The petitioner has not questioned the proceedings No.A/225/2022 dated 09.06.2022 issued by the Additional Collector, which is the basis for issuance of the impugned proceedings dated 18.10.2024 by the respondent No.4. The disputes herein are relating to the identification and change of extent mentioned in the disputed survey numbers. These issues are required to be adjudicated either by the competent civil Court or by the authority constituted under the provisions of the L.R.Act, 1317 Fasli. The grievance of the petitioner is that no notice is issued to him before conducting survey and the said action on the part of respondents amounts to violation of principles of natural justice.

7. Since it is the case of the petitioner that no notice is issued to him prior to conducting survey, this Court is of the opinion that ends of justice would be met if the petitioner is permitted to file an application under Section 166-C of the Telangana Land Revenue Act, 1317F, before the Government, if he is aggrieved with the proceedings dated 09.06.2022 issued by the Additional Collector, within a period of three (3) weeks from the date of receipt of copy of this order. In the event of filing such application, respondent No.1 is directed to examine the same by duly calling for the connected records and after issuing notice to all the interested parties, pass appropriate orders, in accordance with law. Till the disposal of the application to be filed by the petitioner, the Tahsildar is directed not to entertain any applications for rectification of entries/change of extent or survey numbers/for issuance of supplementary setwar/change of nature of the lands in respect of the subject property, in any manner. In case, if the petitioner has not filed any application within the time stipulated above, the respondents are at liberty to take appropriate action, in accordance with law.”

(Emphasis Supplied)

3. As per the aforesaid order of the learned Single Judge, respondent No.1/writ petitioner was at liberty to assail the order/proceedings No.A/225/2022 of the Additional Collector, dated

09.06.2022 before the Government.

4. On a specific query from the Bench, learned counsel for respondent No.1/writ petitioner submits that respondent No.1 preferred an application before the District Collector against the aforesaid order of the Additional Collector.

5. Learned counsel for the appellants/respondent Nos.6 to 8 submits that the said application filed by respondent No.1 before the District Collector is not maintainable. The order of this Court in the instant Writ Petition is very clear that if the writ petitioner has not filed any application within the stipulated time before the Government, the official respondents were at liberty to take appropriate action, in accordance with the law.

6. Learned Government Pleader of Revenue submits that against the order of the Additional Collector, no appeal lies to the District Collector.

7. Since respondent No.1/writ petitioner has not preferred any proceedings before the appropriate authority as directed by the learned Single Judge in his order in paragraph No.7, official respondents/respondent Nos.2 to 5 are at liberty to proceed in accordance with the law. It is made clear that since respondent No.1