Telangana High CourtRamaola Rajashekar vs The State Of Telangana on 19 February, 2021Author:A.Abhishek ReddyBench:A.Abhishek ReddyTHE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE A.ABHISHEK REDDY\n\n               WRIT PETITION No.28776 of 2018\nORDER:Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners, the learned\n\nGovernment Pleader for Revenue for respondent Nos.1 to 4, and\n\nSri   Vedula   Srivinas,   the   learned   counsel   appearing   for\n\nrespondent Nos.5 to 8. With their consent, the Writ Petition is\n\ndisposed of at the stage of admission.This writ petition is filed questioning the inaction on the\n\npart of respondent No.4 in conducting the de novo enquiry for\n\nthe last 13 years, as per the order passed by respondent No.3,\n\ndated 22.02.2005, which was confirmed by respondent No.2\n\nvide order dated 30.04.2009.The case of the petitioners, in brief, is that the father of\n\npetitioner Nos.1 and 2 and petitioner No.3 are the absolute\n\nowners and possessors of the agricultural land, admeasuring\n\nAcs.11.90 cents, situated in Survey No.128 of Perkapalli Village,\n\nBellampally Mandal, Mancherial District, having purchased the\n\nsame from the father of the unofficial respondent Nos.5 to 8\n\nthrough sada bainama on 30.05.1996 and 06.03.1972. They\n\nhave made an application to respondent No.4 - the Tahsildar,\n\nBellampally Mandal, for regularisation of the ordinary sale deed\n\nunder Form X, but no orders were passed thereon. However,\n\nrespondent No.4, the primary authority, without verifying the\n\nrevenue records and the application made by the father of\n\npetitioner Nos.1 and 2 and petitioner No.3, granted partition in2favour of respondent Nos.5 to 8, without issuing any notice to\n\nthe persons who are in possession of the subject property, and\n\nissued pattadar pass books and title deeds. Aggrieved by the\n\nsame, the father of petitioner Nos.1 and 2 and petitioner No.3\n\nfiled an appeal before respondent No.3-Revenue Divisional\n\nOfficer, Bellampally. After hearing the arguments, respondent\n\nNo.3 has allowed the said appeal and remanded the matter to\n\nthe primary authority, for conducting de novo enquiry, vide\n\norder dated 22.02.2005. The father of petitioner Nos.1 and 2\n\ndied on 26.09.2008.Aggrieved by the order passed by respondent No.3, the\n\nunofficial respondent Nos.5 to 8 filed a revision before\n\nrespondent No.2-Joint Collector, Mancherial District, and\n\nrespondent No.2 has dismissed the said revision on 30.04.2009\n\nconfirming the order passed by respondent No.3.In pursuance of the order dated 22.02.2005 passed by\n\nrespondent No.3, the primary authority has issued notices to\n\nthe respondents on 30.01.2010, 29.02.2010 and 12.01.2016 for\n\nconducting de novo enquiry. The grievance of the petitioners is\n\nthat except issuing the notices, the primary authority has not\n\ntaken any steps for conducting the de novo enquiry.Learned counsel for the petitioners has stated that the\n\nappeal filed by the petitioners before respondent No.3 was\n\nallowed on 22.02.2005, remanding the matter to the primary\n\nauthority for conducting de novo enquiry, and the revision filed\n\nby the unofficial respondents against the said order was3dismissed on 30.04.2009.        That subsequent to the remand of\n\nthe matter by respondent No.3, the primary authority except\n\nissuing notices has not taken any steps to conduct de novo\n\nenquiry, and therefore, seeks a direction from this Court to the\n\nprimary authority to conduct de novo enquiry and pass orders\n\nin accordance with law.Per   contra,    the   learned     counsel     appearing      for   the\n\nunofficial respondents has stated that the petitioners have\n\nalready approached the Civil Court for declaration of title and\n\ninjunction, and therefore, as per sub-Section (2) ofSection 8of\n\nthe Andhra Pradesh Rights in Land and Pattadar Pass Books\n\nAct, 1971 (for short, the oldROR Act'), the primary authority\n\ncannot go into the disputed questions of title and they have to\n\nawait the result of the suit filed by them. He has drawn the\n\nattention of this Court to sub-Section (2) ofSection 8of the oldROR Act, which reads as under:"(2) If any person is aggrieved as to any right of which he\n     is in possession by an entry made in any record of rights he\n     may institute a suit against any person denying or interested to\n     deny his title to such right for declaration of his right underChapter-VI of the Specific Relief Act, 1963and the entry in the\n     record of rights shall be amended in accordance with any such\n     declaration."The learned Government Pleader has stated that as on\n\ndate theROR Actis repealed and a new Act beingThe\n\nTelangana Rights in Land and Pattadar Pass Books Act, 2020(in short 'ROR Act, 2020') has come into force. That the primary\n\nauthority has no power to deal with the matter as per the4provisions of the oldROR Act, and if the petitioners are so\n\nadvised, they can approach the District Collector ventilating\n\ntheir grievances under the new ROR Act, 2020.In view of the above mentioned facts and circumstances,\n\nwithout going into the merits or demerits of the case, this Court\n\nis of the prima facie opinion that the order of respondent No.3\n\nremanding the matter to the primary authority has become\n\nredundant, for the reason that the petitioners have already\n\napproached the Civil Court by filing a suit for declaration of\n\ntitle. It is needless to observe that the decision, if any, of the\n\nCivil Court in the suit filed by the petitioners would not only\n\nbind the parties to the said suit but also the Revenue\n\nauthorities and they are bound to implement the same. On this\n\nground alone, this Court is not inclined to entertain this writ\n\npetition.The writ petition is, accordingly, dismissed.    However, if\n\nthe petitioners are so advised, they are free to file an application\n\nbefore the competent authority under the new ROR Act, 2020.\n\nOn such application being filed, the competent authority shall\n\nput the parties on notice and pass appropriate orders strictly on\n\nmerits and in accordance with law.The miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shall stand\n\nclosed. There shall be no order as to costs.________________________\n                                          A.ABHISHEK REDDY, J\nDate : 19.02.2021\nva