Gokari Narsimha Goud v. The State Of Telangana
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR WRIT PETITION NO.2498 OF 2019
O R D E R
In the light of the order proposed to be passed without going in to the merits of the matter, this Court sees no necessity to either put the unofficial respondents on notice or afford them an opportunity of hearing. The grievance of the petitioners is that the Revenue Divisional Officer, Chevella Revenue Division, Ranga Reddy District, issued proceedings dated 06.10.2001, which were subjected to revision by them before the Joint Collector, Ranga Reddy District, under Section 9 of the Telangana Rights in Land and Pattadar Pass Books Act, 1971, but no steps are being taken by the revisionary authority thereon. Be it noted that the revision was filed by the petitioners as long back as on 16.10.2018. The petitioners also filed a stay application therein. As Sri A.
Jagan, learned counsel for the petitioners, informed this Court that no steps were taken by the revisionary authority to even number the case and the I.A. filed therein, the learned Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue, State of Telangana, was asked to get instructions and the matter was passed over. Now, the learned Assistant Government Pleader would inform this Court that the revision filed by the petitioners was numbered as Revision Case No.D1/4746/2018 and notices having been issued to the respondents therein, the revisionary authority adjourned the matter to 04.05.2019.
When the Statute visits upon the Joint Collector the quasi-judicial power to entertain a revision, it is not open to such statutory revisionary authority to keep a revision pending indefinitely or adjourn the same by
long dates. Valuable property rights of the parties would be at stake and the same cannot be negated owing to the inaction or delay on the part of the statutory authority in dealing with the main case or the interim application filed therein.
In that view of the matter and as the revisionary authority has already taken steps to number the revision case filed by the petitioners, the writ petition is disposed of permitting the petitioners to move an appropriate application for advancement of the hearing of the I.A. filed in their revision case, if they so choose. Needless to state, in the event such an application is made, the revisionary authority shall consider the same and take up the I.A. for hearing on an earlier date, if circumstances permit.
Pending miscellaneous petitions, if any, shall stand closed in the light of this final order. No order as to costs. _______________ SANJAY KUMAR, J 8th FEBRUARY, 2019 Svv