Komuravelly Srinivas v. The State Of Telangana

HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE C.PRAVEEN KUMAR WRIT PETITION No.32344 of 2018 ORDER :

Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned Government Pleader for Revenue (Telangana).

2.

With the consent of both parties, the Writ Petition is disposed of at the admission stage.

3.

The present Writ Petition came to be filed questioning the order of the Revenue Divisional Officer - respondent No.3, dated 07.08.2018, wherein the appeal preferred against endorsement proceedings of the Tahsildar - respondent No.4 rejecting to mutate the names of the petitioners in the revenue records was confirmed.

4.

Learned counsel for the petitioners would submit that though the petitioners are in possession of the property and that there is enough material on record to show that they are the owners of the property, for reasons best known, the Tahsildar, as well as the Revenue Divisional Officer (RDO) did not consider the same.

5.

It is to be noted that against the order of the RDO, a revision under Section 9 of the A.P.Rights in Land and Pattadar Pass Books Act (for short, 'the Act') would lie bfore the Joint Collector. Without availing the said remedy, the petitioners have approached this Court by filing the Writ Petition.

6.

Hence, I see no grounds to entertain this Writ Petition and the same is dismissed. However, the petitioners, if so advised, shall prefer a revision under Section 9 of the Act before the Joint Collector, in which event, the said authority shall deal with the same, in accordance with law. It is needless to mention that the petitioners are at liberty to make an application seeking interim direction along with the revision, in which event, the authorities shall pass orders, at the earliest, in accordance with law. 7.

As a sequel thereto, Miscellaneous Petitions, if any, pending in this Writ Petition, shall stand closed. No costs. _______________________ C.PRAVEEN KUMAR, J Date: 10.09.2018 vhb