Pokkula Kanakaiah v. The State Of Telangana

THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE P.NAVEEN RAO WRIT PETITION No.26253 OF 2019 Dated:28.11.2019 Between:

Pokkula Kanakaiah, S/o. Late Ashaiah, Aged about 45 years, Occ: Agriculture, R/o. Gudibanda Village, Kodad Mandal, Suryapet District (Nalgonda) .. Petitioner And The State of Telangana, rep., by its Principal Secretary, Revenue Department, Secretariat Buildings, Hyderabad and others .. Respondents This Court made the following:

- 2 - THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE P.NAVEEN RAO WRIT PETITION No.26253 OF 2019 ORDER:

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Government Pleader for Revenue for respondents 1 to 4. 2.

Petitioner claims that without following due process, the names of respondents 5 to 7 are incorporated in the revenue records. Aggrieved by the same, the petitioner applied for furnishing the relevant documents/information under the Right to Information Act. The Tahsildar, Kodad Mandal, vide his memo dated nil.12.2018 informed the petitioner that the information sought by him is not available. Armed with this reply given to the petitioner, he preferred revision bearing No.F2/2858/2019 praying to call for the records from the Tahsildar concerning the properties of the petitioner mentioned in the schedule appended to the revision; to delete the entries made by the Tahsildar and to substitute his name in the revenue records as pattadar and possessor. Alleging that there is no progress in the revision, this Writ Petition is filed. 3.

Learned counsel for the petitioner pressed to dispose of the Writ Petition by directing the revisional authority to dispose of the revision filed by the petitioner as early as possible. 4.

Having regard to the same, the Writ Petition is disposed of directing the Joint Collector to dispose of the revision bearing No.F2/2858/2019, as expeditiously as possible preferably within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of

- 3 - this order, after affording due opportunity to the respective parties and by assigning due reasons in support of his decision. It is made clear that there is no expression of opinion and the respondents 5 to 7 who are arrayed as respondents 1 to 3 in the revision are entitled to raise all pleas as available in law and the Joint Collector shall consider all the objections raised by the respective parties. Pending miscellaneous petitions, if any, shall stand closed.

____________________ P.NAVEEN RAO, J Date:28.11.2019 KH