issue of patta pass book = It may be true that the petitioner purchased 3 acres of land in the survey number, referred to above. The fact, however, remains that, much before the transfer, in her favour, the 4th respondent got validated a transaction in his favour, way back in the year 2000, obviously under Section 5-A of the Act. Unless that is challenged either by the petitioner or her vendor, the same state of affairs would remain. Further, in case the petitioner feels that any wrong or untenable entries were made in the revenue records, she has to avail the remedy of appeal, under Section 5(5) of the Act. Either way, the memo issued by the 3rd respondent cannot be said to be illegal or untenable.

THE HON’BLE MR JUSTICE L. NARASIMHA REDDY

Writ Petition No.23462 of 2012

ORDER:

The petitioner claims to have purchased 3 acres of land in Sy.No.14/A/2 of Jayagiri Revenue Village, Hasanparthy Mandal, Warangal District, through a sale deed, being document No.5450 of 2010, dated 27-09-2010.  Based on this purchase, she submitted an application before the Tahsildar, Hasanparthy Mandal, the
3^rd respondent herein, with a request to incorporate her name in the revenue records and to issue pattadar pass books and title deeds.  The 3^rd respondent issued notice, as required under Section 5(3) of the A.P. Rights in Land and Pattadar Pass Books Act, 1971 (for short ‘the Act’), to the concerned persons.  The 4^th respondent filed objection, stating that he purchased that very land, under an unregistered sale deed, and that the same has been validated through proceedings dated 28-12-2000, issued by the
3^rd respondent.  It is also stated that his name was entered in the revenue records.  Taking note of this fact, the 3^rd respondent issued memo dated 11-06-2012, expressing his inability to accede to the request of the petitioner.  The same is challenged in this writ petition.

Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Government Pleader for Revenue.

It may be true that the petitioner purchased 3 acres of land in the survey number, referred to above.  The fact, however, remains that, much before the transfer, in her favour, the 4^th respondent got validated a transaction in his favour, way back in the year 2000, obviously under Section 5-A of the Act.  Unless that is challenged either by the petitioner or her vendor, the same state of affairs would remain.  Further, in case the petitioner feels that any wrong or untenable entries were made in the revenue records, she has to avail the remedy of appeal, under Section 5(5) of the Act.  Either way, the memo issued by the 3^rd respondent cannot be said to be illegal or untenable.

The writ petition is accordingly disposed of, leaving it open to the petitioner to avail the remedies, in accordance with law.

The miscellaneous petition filed in this writ petition shall also stand disposed of.   There shall be no order as to costs.

_______________________

L. NARASIMHA REDDY, J.

Dt.05-10-2012.

KO