Bomma Bapu Reddy v. State Of Telangana

THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE A.RAMALINGESWARA RAO WRIT PETITION No.2656 OF 2018 ORDER:

In spite of granting time to the learned Government Pleader, he did not get instructions and this Court is constrained to dispose of the writ petition in those circumstances.

The petitioner states that he purchased land of an extent of Acs.0.20 guntas in Survey No.702/1 situated at Tandur Village and Mandal, Adilabad District, and now Mancherial District, under registered sale deed, dated 30.10.2004. His vendor delivered possession and he continued to be in possession of the said land. When the petitioner approached the fourth respondent for mutating his name in the revenue records and issuance of pattadar pass books, no action was taken by him. In those circumstances, the petitioner filed W.P.No.10050 of 2014 and this Court disposed of the said writ petition giving liberty to the petitioner to submit an application in the prescribed Form-6 by paying necessary fee and the fourth respondent was directed to pass appropriate orders.

In the meanwhile, the petitioner came to know that some entries were wrongly recorded in the revenue records ignoring the purchase of the land by the petitioner. He submitted a representation to the SubCollector, Asifabad, on 15.12.2015 for issuance of pattadar pass books by conducting enquiry. He treated the same as Appeal and issued notice to the parties. He sought a report from the fourth respondent and the fourth respondent submitted the report on 01.02.2016. On formation of new Division at Bellampalli during the year 2016, the Sub-Collector, Asifabad, transferred the file to the third respondent.

10.08.2017 cancelling the earlier orders passed in respect of the land of an extent of Acs.1.33 guntas in Survey No.702/1 and directed the fourth respondent to rectify the defects and incorporate necessary changes in favour of the petitioner in respect of the land of an extent of Acs.0.20 guntas in Survey No.702/1. In spite of the same, when the fourth respondent has not taken any action, the present writ petition is filed.

It is unfortunate that the fourth respondent being a subordinate officer did not implement the orders of the third respondent, dated 10.08.2017. If no Appeal/Revision is preferred against the said order, the fourth respondent is directed to implement the order of the third respondent, dated 10.08.2017 within a period of fifteen days from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. The writ petition is accordingly disposed of. Consequently, miscellaneous petitions, if any pending, in this writ petition, shall stand closed. There shall be no order as to costs. __________________________ A.RAMALINGESWARA RAO, J 14.02.2018 pln