THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE N.V. SHRAVAN KUMAR

ORDER

Questioning the order of the respondent No.1, Tahsildar, Mancherial Mandal, Adilabad District, passed in Proceedings No.ROR/Mancherial/121/08 dated 23.12.2008, without notice and opportunity to the petitioner and thereby recording the name of the respondent No.2, Surimilla Anantha Rao, in Revenue records in respect of Ac.0.12 guntas in Sy.No.362, situated at Mancherial town, Adilabad District, petitioner filed the present writ petition.

2. Brief facts of the case are that the petitioner claims to have purchased lands to an extent of 373.33 square yards under a registered sale deed dated 28-06-2004 and another extent of 245 square yards under a registered sale deed dated 03-03-2008 and one another to an extent of 191.66 square yards under a registered sale deed dated 03-03-2008. As submitted, the total extent comes to 809.66 square yards which is a contiguous plot. Out of the total extent, petitioner submits that he constructed a house to an extent of 373.66 square yards. It is further case of the petitioner that the vendor of the petitioner one Mr. M.Venkata Ramulu, earlier had purchased the said extent from one Mr. Purella Babu and Seva John on 21-04-2004 and at the time of purchase, the petitioner gave paper publication inviting objections, if any.

3. It is submitted that the petitioner’s vendor's vendor got the property in a family partition in O.S.No.343 of 1971 vide the compromise decree dated 29-12-1971, which was never challenged by the respondent No.2. Later, one Mr. Purella Narayana, who is one of the family members of the petitioner’s vendor's vendor, tried to interfere with the possession of the petitioner claiming rights over the property, then the petitioner filed a suit in O.S. No.115 of 2006 on the file of the Junior Civil Judge, Mancherial wherein the trial Court granted injunction in I.A. No.209 of 2006 dated 20-02-2006 against the said Purella Narayana and others. During the subsistence of the said injunction and when the petitioner was making construction, the said Purella Narayana tried to object the construction, with the help of Mancherial Municipality. Thereafter, petitioner filed W.P.No.26523 of 2006 against the Mancherial Municipality and Purella Narayana and this Court allowed the said writ petition on 20-12-2006. Thereafter, the petitioner constructed the house to an extent of 373.66 square yards and the remaining extent of land is left vacant.

4. It is further submitted that the petitioner got the sale transaction regularized under Section 5-A of the Pattadar Passbook Act in the year 2004, by an order of the respondent No.1. Aggrieved by the said order the respondent No.2 filed W.P. No.1768 of 2007 (in which the petitioner herein is the respondent No.5) assailing the proceedings of the Mandal Revenue Officer, Mancherial Mandal, Adilabad District, bearing No.RoR/Mancherial/28/04, dated Nil-07-2004 whereby the Mandal Revenue Officer, Mancherial Mandal, respondent No.3 therein, exercising the powers under Section 5-A of the Andhra Pradesh Rights in Land and Pattadar Pass Books Act, 1971 regularised the sale transaction in favour of the respondent No.5 therein, who is petitioner herein, and sought invalidation of the said order as it was in contravention of the provisions of the Act. The said writ petition was allowed by this Court on 26-04-2007 holding that “…. Admittedly, fifth respondent purchased house site under registered sale deed, which is also property purchased by the petitioner under simple sale deed dated 21.10.1957, which was regularised and certified by the second respondent under the Stamp Act. Therefore, the impugned order passed by the third respondent is without jurisdiction and also in violation of principles of natural justice. It is brought to the notice of this Court that fifth respondent filed O.S. No.14 of 2007 for injunction and obtained ad interim injunction. Therefore, the petitioner herein who is a party defendant in the said s