Vadla K.Sudhakara Chary, v. The State Of Telangana,

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT HYDERABAD

FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA & THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH * * * * WRIT PETITION No.28720 of 2015 BETWEEN Vadla K. Sudhakara Chary and others.

... PETITIONERS AND The State of Telangana, Rep. by its District Collector, Mahaboobnagar District and others.

...RESPONDENTS DATE OF JUDGMENT PRONOUNCED: 21.09.2015 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 No.1 is the son and petitioner No.2 is the wife of one Late Purushotham and petitioner No.3 is the paternal uncle of petitioner No.1.

2. Petitioner No.1 states that his father was granted Occupancy Rights Certificate (ORC) by the Revenue Divisional Officer, Nagarkurnool in proceedings No.I/3865/97 dated 10.10.1997 under Item 90 thereof with regard to Sy.No.363/1 admeasuring Ac.2.20 guntas. Petitioner No.1 also states that succession order was also passed by the Mandal Revenue Officer, Nagarkurnool under proceedings dated 29.12.1997. Petitioner No.1 also states that pattadar passbooks and title deeds were also issued to his father in the year 2009 and that his father died before he could take up proceedings for implementation of the order of the MRO dated 29.12.1997. Petitioners, consequently, having obtained succession, sought implementation thereof for issuance of pattadar pass books and title deeds by asserting that they are paying land revenue. Petitioners have also made various applications including the application before the District Collector dated 30.06.2014 on which the Tahsildar, Nagarkurnool was required to examine and take necessary action as per rules immediately.

3. The grievance of the petitioners in this writ petition is that in spite of the above direction the third respondent has not taken further action.

4. Learned Government Pleader was earlier granted time to get instructions but he is unable to get instructions.

5. In the circumstances, the third respondent is directed to consider the request of the petitioners in due compliance with the endorsement of the District Collector, referred to above and pass necessary orders in

accordance with law, preferably, within a period of six (6) weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.

The 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 21, 2015 DSK