THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE K.SARATH WRIT PETITION No.14688 OF 2019

ORDER:

1. This Writ Petition is filed challenging the Order dated 27.04.2019 passed by the Joint Collector, Vikarabad District/respondent No.2 in Revision case vide File No.D1/2900/2018, whereby the orders passed by the Revenue Divisional Officer, Viakarabad/respondent No.3 in Appeal No.C/379/2010 dated 04.09.2017 were set aside.

2. Heard the learned Counsel for the petitioners and the learned Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue appearing for the official respondents and Mrs.Rachna Reddy, learned Senior Counsel appearing for the unofficial respondent Nos.5 and 6 and perused the record.

3. The learned Counsel for the petitioners would submit that the land admeasuring to an extent of Ac.12.10 guntas in Sy.No.22, situated at Pommapur Village, Bantwaram Revenue Mandal, Vikarabad District (hereinafter after referred to as ‘subject lands’) were Government lands and the Government, by exercising its rights as owners, gave the said lands to the elders of the petitioners on lease on ‘Ek Sal Cultivation’ and the leaseholders were also paying rents through challans in respect of the subject lands.

4. The learned Counsel for the petitioners would further submit that, one Manohar Rao filed W.P.No.2991/1980 against the Tahsildar, Marpally Taluq restraining him from putting the said lands trough auction ‘Ek Sal Cultivation/One Year Cultivation’ basis and from dealing with the same in pursuance of the Notification No.A/265/1980 subject lands in pursuance of the Notification No.A3/265/1980 dated 10.06.1980 and the said writ petition was dismissed on 13.02.1981, which establishes that the subject lands are Government lands as per Section 12 of the ROR Act.

5. The learned Counsel for the petitioners would further submit that in the light of the orders passed by this Court in WP No.2991/1980 coupled with the challans, through which the rents were being paid, the subject lands are Government lands. Contrary to the same, the respondents in collusion and in connivance created several documents in the year, 2017 and the fact that the subject lands being Governments lands have been buried for the advantage of the unofficial respondents and the Government failed to protect its own lands despite specific pleadings.

6. The learned Counsel for the petitioners would submit that upon the application made by the petitioners the Revenue Divisonal Officer concluded the enquiry and passed orders setting aside the orders of the Tahsildar, Bantwaram in File No.B/496/2009 dated 13.02.2009 and cancelled the Pattadar Pass Books and title Deeds issued in favour of the unofficial respondents. Assailing the same, the unofficial respondents filed WP No.40560 of 2017 and also filed Revision Case No.D1/2900/2018 and this Court granted interim stay. While it being so, the Joint Collector, Vikarabad vide orders dated 27.04.2019 allowed the Revision covering the subjects lands as patta land.

7. The learned Counsel for the petitioners would submit that the unofficial respondent Nos.5 and 6 have pleaded different set of facts in their application for mutation. The MRO/Tahsildar in the panchanama recorded a different fact. Only during the proceedings in the year 2017, circumventing with the specific pleadings of the writ petitioners with regard to large scale creation of false documents, the respondent Nos.5 and 6 have created further documents and trying to circumvent with the assertion of the petitioners with regard to the fraudulent facts and also cheating committed by the respondent No.5 and 6 in obtaining succession proceedings in their favour to deprive the rights of the petitioners.

8. The learned Counsel for the petitioners would further submit that the Joint Collector, failed to note the fraudulent claim of the respondent Nos.5 and 6, changing of their stand from time to time by depriving the rights of the petitioners over the subject lands and requested to allow the writ petition by setting aside the ord