Even in the absence of a prescribed limitation period for the exercise of revisional or corrective power over revenue records, such powers must be exercised within a reasonable time; an unexplained delay of 20 years renders a claim stale and unentertainable.

ORDER:

This writ petition is filed to issue a writ of Certiorari calling for the records pursuant to the impugned Order dated 31.01.2019, in Revision Case No.D1/2176/2018, passed by respondent No.2, under Section 9 of the T.S. Rights in Land and Pattedar Pass Books Act, 1971 (for short ‘the Act, 1971’), and set aside the said order, as the same is illegal and arbitrary.

2. Heard Sri Kiran Palakurthy, learned counsel for the petitioners, Sri Srinivas Murthy Cheedella, learned Counsel for respondent No.6 and learned Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue.

3. Brief facts of the case as averred in the writ affidavit are that petitioners are the absolute owners and possessors being the 50% shareholders of land admeasuring Ac.1.03 guntas in Sy.No.141 and Ac.1.34 guntas in Sy.No.142, situated at Ravolkole Village of Medchal Mandal (hereinafter referred to as ‘subject property’), having acquired the same by way of succession from late Dashmanth Reddy, who is husband of petitioner no.1 and father of petitioner no.2; that originally, one late Damma Reddy was the absolute owner and possessor of various extents of lands including subject property and after his death, his two sons i.e., Dashmanth Reddy and Bapu Reddy succeeded to the subject property and the same has been partitioned between them, mutations were effected and the pattadar passbooks were also issued to them for their respective shares; that late Dashmanth Reddy moved to Nizamabad for better future prospect and after the death of late Dashmanth Reddy, petitioner No.1 was taking care of the affairs of their lands; that when the petitioners visited their lands for the purpose of digging the bore-well, Bapu Reddy along with respondent Nos.7 to 9, interfered with their possession; that when the petitioners made an application to the revenue authorities, petitioners came to know that the name of late Dashmanth Reddy was removed and the name of Bapu Reddy i.e., father of respondent No.7 to 9, was recorded in respect of entire extent of the land in Sys.No.141 and 142; that no mutation proceedings are available as to the alteration of names and on an application made through RTI, petitioners came to know that the name of late Dashmanth Reddy was deleted and a copy of pahani for the year 1989-1990, was enclosed stating that the entries got altered and subsequently, again the name of Late Dashmanth Reddy was continued from the years 1990-1991 till 1996-97.

4. It is further averred that no notices were issued to petitioners by respondent No.4 before altering the names in the revenue records and as such, aggrieved by the same, petitioners filed an appeal before respondent No.3 vide file No.A2/1116/2014; that respondent No.3 after issuing notice to all affected parties and considering their objections and after going through the merits of the case, remanded the matter to respondent No.4, to conduct enquiry with respect to the amendments made in respect of the subject property; that the respondent No.4 conducted enquiry by following the procedure as contemplated under the Act, 1971 and issued the proceedings vide File No.B/383/2017, dated 03.06.2017, directing the respondent No.5 to enter the names of petitioners to the extent of the land held by late Dashmanth Reddy.

5. It is further averred that aggrieved by the said order, respondent No.6 preferred an appeal before respondent No.2, and the same was allowed vide proceedings No.D1/2176/2018, dated 31.01.2019, setting aside the order passed by respondent No.4. Aggrieved by the same, the present Writ Petition is filed.

6. Learned counsel for the pe