← Library
High Court for State of TelanganaWP/40332/2015disposed of no costs

M.Surya Prakash Rao v. The State Of Andhra Pradesh

2016-01-04Vilas V.Afzulpurkar2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT HYDERABAD

FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA & THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH * * * * WRIT PETITION No.40332 of 2015 BETWEEN M. Surya Prakash Rao.

... PETITIONER AND The State of Andhra Pradesh, Rep. by its District Collector, Department of Revenue, Chilakalapudi, Machilipatnam and others. ...RESPONDENTS DATE OF JUDGMENT PRONOUNCED: 04.01.2016 THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE VILAS V. AFZULPURKAR 1.

Whether Reporters of Local newspapers may be allowed to see the Judgments?

No 2.

Whether the copies of judgment may be marked to Law Reporters/Journals?

No 3.

Whether Their Ladyship/Lordship wish to see the fair copy of the Judgment?

No

ORDER:

Petitioner is aggrieved by grant of pattadar pass books and title deeds in favour of respondents 5 to 7 and thereby, preferred an appeal before the Revenue Divisional Officer under Ref.No.C/2742/2014 in which notices were already issued. However, in view of the latest decision of a Division Bench of this Court in RATNAMMA v. REVENUE DIVISIONAL [1] OFFICER , petitioner states that the said appeal is not an appropriate remedy and as such, has questioned the grant of pattadar pass books and title deeds to respondents 5 to 7 in this writ petition.

2. There is no reason to entertain the writ petition, as the petitioner himself had filed an appeal, which is pending before the second respondent. If the petitioner feels that the said appeal is not maintainable, for any reason, he can as well avail the remedy under Section 9 of the A.P. Rights in Land and Pattadar Pass Books Act (for short 'the Act'). The said remedy under Section 9 of the Act, being very wide, there is no ground to entertain the writ petition directly. Hence, the writ petition is disposed of with a liberty to the petitioner to withdraw the said appeal, if he so desires and prefer a revision petition under Section 9 of the Act, as referred to above.

As a sequel, the miscellaneous applications, if any, shall stand closed. There shall be no order as to costs.

______________________ VILAS V. AFZULPURKAR, J January 4, 2016 DSK [1] 2015 (5) ALT 228 (DB)