M. Srinivas Reddy v. State Of Telangana, Rep.By Its Principal Secretary,

HON'BLE THE ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE DILIP B. BHOSALE AND HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE S.V. BHATT WAMP No.2713 OF 2015 AND WRIT APPEAL No.1104 OF 2015 10-12-2015 Between:

M. Srinivas Reddy and another ... Appellants And State of Telangana, rep., by its Principal Secretary, Revenue Department, Secretariat, Hyderabad and others ... Respondents

HON'BLE THE ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE DILIP B. BHOSALE AND HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE S.V. BHATT WAMP No.2713 OF 2015 AND WRIT APPEAL No.1104 OF 2015 PC: (per the Hon'ble Sri Justice S.V. Bhatt) Heard learned counsel for the petitioners. None appears for respondent Nos.4 to 8.

In the miscellaneous petition, the petitioners seek the following relief:

"For all the reasons stated in the accompanying affidavit, it is therefore, prayed that this Hon'ble Court may be pleased to grant leave to the appellants herein to challenge the order dated 07.9.2015 passed in WP No. 28842 of 2015 by the Learned Single Judge of this Hon'ble Court of Hyderabad for the State of Telangana and the State of Andhra Pradesh and be pleased to pass such other order or orders, as this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper in the circumstances of the case."

The learned single Judge disposed of Writ Petition No.28842 of 2015 by the following innocuous order:

"Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned Government Pleader for Revenue.

The petitioners complain the inaction on the part of the Tahsildar, Chevella Mandal, Ranga Reddy District, the 3rd respondent, in passing appropriate orders on the application filed by them on 06.05.2015 under Section 6-A of the Andhra Pradesh Rights in Land and Pattadar Passbooks Act, 1971 by paying necessary fee through Online for mutation and issuance of pattadar passbooks and title deeds. Hence, the Writ Petition.

Since the application of the petitioners is required to be

considered and disposed of within a time bound schedule of 45 days, the Writ Petition is disposed of directing the 3rd respondent to consider the said application on its own merits and pass appropriate orders expeditiously, preferably within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order."

Learned counsel for the petitioners in support of his prayer for grant of leave to appeal contends that respondent No.3 in terms of writ order is proceeding to effect mutation in the revenue records without issuing notice to petitioners herein.

We have perused the order of the learned single Judge. In our view, what is submitted across the Bar is only an apprehension. To ally the fears, we permit the petitioners to file objections before respondent No.3 against the representation filed by respondent Nos.4 to 8. Respondent No.3 shall consider the representation as well as the objections of parties, before any decision is taken in this behalf. With the above observations, the miscellaneous petition is disposed of. Consequently, writ appeal (SR) is closed and disposed of as such.

_________________________ DILIP B. BHOSALE, ACJ ________________________ S.V. BHATT, J 10-12-2015 ks