High Court for State of TelanganaWP/28294/2015disposed of no costs

Sri Koduganti , Kodavaganti Seetharama Sastry, v. The Principal Secretary, Revenue, State Of Telangana,

2015-09-02Vilas V.Afzulpurkar2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT HYDERABAD

FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA & THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH * * * WRIT PETITION No. 28294 of 2015 BETWEEN Koduganti @ Kodavaganti Seetharama Sastry ... PETITIONERS AND The State of Telangana, Rep. by its Principal Secretary, Revenue Department and others ...RESPONDENTS Date of Order pronounced: 02.09.2015 SUBMITTED FOR APPROVAL:

THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE VILAS V. AFZULPURKAR

1. Whether Reporters of Local newspapers Yes/No may be allowed to see the Judgments?

2. Whether the copies of judgment may be Yes/No marked to Law Reporters/Journals?

3. Whether his Lordship wish to see the Yes/No fair copy of the Judgment?

ORDER:- Heard.

2. Petitioner is aggrieved by the order passed by the Revenue Divisional Officer (RDO), third respondent, wherein petitioner's application for grant of Occupancy Rights Certificate (ORC) was rejected and the similar application of respondent Nos.5 and 6 was allowed.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner states that the said order does not take into consideration the title of the petitioner and HIS possession from their forefathers and straight away ORC is given to respondent Nos.5 and 6. The correctness of the said order of RDO is accordingly questioned.

4. Evidently, the RDO is the primary authority under the A.P. (Telangana Area) Abolition of Inams Act, 1955 and against every order of the primary authority an appeal is provided under Section 24 of the Act. Petitioner, therefore, has an efficacious alternative remedy of questioning the correctness or otherwise of the said order and the appellate authority is entitled to go into all the questions in view of the vide jurisdiction conferred on the appellate authority. To enable the petitioner to avail the said appellate remedy and seek appropriate orders from the appellate authority, the impugned order shall remain stayed for a period of two weeks, within which petitioner is at liberty to move the appellate authority and seek appropriate orders.

With the liberty aforesaid, writ petition is disposed of. As a sequel, the miscellaneous applications, if any, shall stand closed. There shall be no order as to costs.

_____________________ VILAS V. AFZULPURKAR, J September 2, 2015 LMV