IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) WEDNESDAY, THE TENTH DAY OF DECEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE L.NARASIMHA REDDY WRIT PETITION NO : 26722 of 2008 Between: 1 K. Ashok Kumar S/o. Late K. Anjaiah R/o. Flat No. 213, Kamshetty Enclaves, Yamuna Block, Ramanthapur, Hyderabad - 13. 2 Dr. K. Rajitha W/o. Late Ashok Kumar R/o. Flat No. 213, Kamshetty Enclaves, Yamuna Block, Ramanthapur, Hyderabad - 13. ..... PETITIONERS AND 1 The Chief Commissioner Land Administration, Government of Andhra Pradesh Nampally Station Road, Hyderabad. 2 The Joint Collector-I Ranga Reddy District Lakdikapool, Khairatabad, Hyderabad. 3 The Inam Tribunal cum Special Grade Deputy Collector cum Revenue Divisional Officer Chevella Division. O/o. Attapur, Rajendra Nagar Mandal, Ranga Reddy District. 4 The Tahsildar (Formerly known as Mandal Revenue Officer) Rajendra Nagar Mandal, Rajendra Nagar, Ranga Reddy District. 5 Mr. Sudersan S/o. Mallesha Kokapet Village, Rajendra Nagar Mandal, Ranga Reddy District. 6 Mr. Narsimha S/o. Mallesha Kokapet Village, Rajendra Nagar Mandal, Ranga Reddy District. 7 Patnam @ Rameswaram Somaiah S/o. Laxmaiah Kokapet Village, Rajendra Nagar Mandal, Ranga Reddy District. 8 Patnam @ Rameswaram Yadaiah S/o. Laxmaiah Kokapet Village, Rajendra Nagar Mandal, Ranga Reddy District. 9 Patnam @ Rameswaram Anjaiah S/o. Laxmaiah Kokapet Village, Rajendra Nagar Mandal, Ranga Reddy District. 10 Rameswaram Soudaiah S/o. Veeraiah Kokapet Village, Rajendra Nagar Mandal, Ranga Reddy District. 11 Rameswaram Yadaiah S/o. Veeraiah Kokapet Village, Rajendra Nagar Mandal, Ranga Reddy District. 12 Smt. R. Andalu D/o. Balaiah, W/o. Swamy Kokapet Village, Rajendra Nagar Mandal, Ranga Reddy District. 13 Smt. R. Narsamma D/o. Balaiah Kokapet Village, Rajendra Nagar Mandal, Ranga Reddy District. 14 Rameswaram Yadaiah S/o. Late Mallaiah Kokapet Village, Rajendra Nagar Mandal, Ranga Reddy District. 15 Rameswaram Krishna S/o. Late Mallaiah Kokapet Village, Rajendra Nagar Mandal, Ranga Reddy District. 16 Rameswaram Nagesh S/o. Late Mallaiah Kokapet Village, Rajendra Nagar Mandal, Ranga Reddy District. 17 Rameswaram Narsimha S/o. Lingaiah Kokapet Village, Rajendra Nagar Mandal, Ranga Reddy District. 18 Rameswaram Nagaiah S/o. Sailoo Kokapet Village, Rajendra Nagar Mandal, Ranga Reddy District. 19 Rameswaram Shankaraiah S/o. Sailoo Kokapet Village, Rajendra Nagar Mandal, Ranga Reddy District. 20 Rameswaram Gandaiah S/o. Sailoo Kokapet Village, Rajendra Nagar Mandal, Ranga Reddy District. 21 Rameswaram Madhav S/o. Sailoo Kokapet Village, Rajendra Nagar Mandal, Ranga Reddy District. 22 Rameswaram Krishna S/o. Sailoo Kokapet Village, Rajendra Nagar Mandal, Ranga Reddy District. 23 Rameswaram Mallaiah S/o. Laxmaiah Kokapet Village, Rajendra Nagar Mandal, Ranga Reddy District. 24 Rameswaram Lingaiah S/o. Jangaiah Kokapet Village, Rajendra Nagar Mandal, Ranga Reddy District. 25 Rameswaram Pentaiah S/o. Sarvaiah Kokapet Village, Rajendra Nagar Mandal, Ranga Reddy District. 26 Rameswaram Suri S/o. Sarvaiah Kokapet Village, Rajendra Nagar Mandal, Ranga Reddy District. 27 Rameswaram Esaiah S/o. Pentaiah Kokapet Village, Rajendra Nagar Mandal, Ranga Reddy District. 28 Rameswaram Danaiah S/o. Pentaiah Kokapet Village, Rajendra Nagar Mandal, Ranga Reddy District. 29 Rameswaram Jangaiah S/o. Pentaiah Kokapet Village, Rajendra Nagar Mandal, Ranga Reddy District. 30 Rameswaram Jangaiah S/o. Gandaiah Kokapet Village, Rajendra Nagar Mandal, Ranga Reddy District. 31 Rameswaram Suresh S/o. Late Yenkaiah Kokapet Village, Rajendra Nagar Mandal, Ranga Reddy District. 32 Rameswaram Yadaiah S/o. Late Mallaiah Kokapet Village, Rajendra Nagar Mandal, Ranga Reddy District. 33 Rameswaram Laxmaiah S/o. Late Mallaiah Kokapet Village, Rajendra Nagar Mandal, Ranga Reddy District. 34 Rameswaram Jangaiah S/o. Late Babaiah Kokapet Village, Rajendra Nagar Mandal, Ranga Reddy District. 35 Rameswaram Yadaiah S/o. Late Babaiah Kokapet Village, Rajendra Nagar Mandal, Ranga Reddy District. 36 Rameswaram Shiva Kumar S/o. Late Babaiah Kokapet Village, Rajendra Nagar Mandal, Ranga Reddy District. 37 Rameswaram Prabhakar S/o. Late Babaiah Kokapet Village, Rajendra Nagar Mandal, Ranga Reddy District. 38 Rameswaram Yadaiah S/o. Late Narsimha Kokapet Village, Rajendra Nagar Mandal, Ranga Reddy District. 39 Rameswaram Raju S/o. Late Narsimha Kokapet Village, Rajendra Nagar Mandal, Ranga Reddy District. 40 Rameswaram Bikshapathi S/o. Late Shankaraiah Kokapet Village, Rajendra Nagar Mandal, Ranga Reddy District. 41 Rameswaram Anil S/o. Late R. Shankaraiah Kokapet Village, Rajendra Nagar Mandal, Ranga Reddy District. 42 K. Chandra Prakash S/o. Late Kistaiah R/o. H.No. 1-8-509, Chikkadpally, Hyderabad. 43 Smt. K. Aruna W/o. K. Chandra Prakash R/o. H.No. 1-8-509, Chikkadpally, Hyderabad. 44 D. Ramanujulu S/o. D. Shiva Ramulu R/o. H.No. 1-8-195, Rajendra Nagar Village & Mandal, R.R. District. .....RESPONDENTS Petition under Article 226 of the constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the Affidavit filed herein the High Court will be pleased to issue a writ or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Certiorari calling for the records from the Respondents 2 and 3 and setting aside the orders of the Respondents 2 & 3 in proceedings File No.F1/6121/2006 dated 9-2-2007 of the 2nd Respondent, Case No.L/1580/2000 dated 26-6-2006 of the 3rd Respondent respectively while declaring the actions of the Respondents 2 & 3 as arbitrary, illegal, unconstitutional and violative of the principles of natural justice. Counsel for the Petitioners : MR.T.SUDHAKAR REDDY Counsel for the Respondents: GP FOR REVENUE The Court made the following : ORDER: An extent of Acs.11.07 guntas of land in survey Nos.84, 134 and 233 of Kokapet Village, Rajendranagar Mandal, Ranga Reddy District, was held as Inam by four persons, by name, Rameshwaram Veeraiah, Lingaiah, Gandaiah and Pentaiah. By enacting A.P. (Telangana Area) Abolition of Inams Act, 1955 (for short ‘the Act’), the State has abolished Inams. The inamdars, or the occupants of inam land, are conferred with the right to be issued Occupancy Rights Certificate (ORC), subject to their entitlement. 2. Various legal heirs of the four individuals, referred to above, have approached the Inam Tribunal-cum-Special Grade Deputy Collector and Revenue Divisional Officer, Chevella Division, the third respondent, for grant of ORC. The third respondent granted ORC in favour of various legal heirs and applicants before him. Feeling aggrieved by the order, dated 08.07.1998, respondents 5 to 9 herein preferred an appeal before the Joint Collector, Ranga Reddy District, the second respondent, under Section 24 of the Act. The appeal was allowed through order, dated 13.03.2000. It was observed that the appellants therein were not issued notice and the adjudication by the third respondent was not comprehensive. The matter was remanded to the third respondent for fresh consideration and disposal. On such remand, the third respondent passed fresh order, dated 26.06.2006, directing that the entire property be divided into five shares and each branch be allotted 1/5th share. 3. The petitioners, who are the purchasers at second stage from some of the legal heirs of the inamdars, filed an appeal before the second respondent, against the order, dated 26.06.2006, passed by the third respondent. The second respondent passed docket order, dated 09.02.2007, dismissing the appeal. He took the view that the land in question belongs to Government. This Writ Petition is filed against this order. 4. Heard Sri T.Sudhakar Reddy, learned counsel for the petitioners; learned Government Pleader for Revenue and Sri K.Subrahmanya Narsu, learned counsel for the contesting respondents, who figured as appellants before the third respondent in the order, dated 26.06.2006. 5. Various persons submitted their claims before the third respondent for issuance of Occupancy Rights Certificate (ORC). In the initial round of litigation, such rights were conferred in favour of quite a large number of persons and the individual extents were also indicated. The order was passed on 08.07.1998 and almost all the ORC holders are said to have executed a sale deed, dated 26.10.1998, in respect of the entire land. The petitioners are said to be the purchasers of Acs.8.10 guntas of land from the vendees under sale deed, dated 26.10.1998. 6. The contesting respondents filed the appeal before the second respondent. They pleaded that their branch was totally ignored and though the entire land was sold long back, absolute rights were conferred on various persons by the third respondent. A detailed discussion was undertaken by the second respondent and through the order, dated 13.03.2000, he had set aside the order, dated 08.07.1998, passed by the third respondent. A direction was issued for fresh consideration and disposal of the matter. 7. It was in this context that the third respondent has undertaken fresh adjudication. He directed that the entire property be divided into five shares and each branch be allotted 1/5th share mentioned therein. The petitioners felt aggrieved by the said order and filed an appeal before the second respondent. The second respondent passed docket order, dated 09.02.2007, which reveals as under: “ Case called. Adv. for appellant present. Respondents are absent. On perusal of the impugned orders and also the pahani of 1973-74 it is seen that the occupiers column is blank. Further even 1972-73 pahani shows occupants column as blank. It is clear that all vacant lands as on crucial day shall vest in government. Accordingly, the case is disposed of by setting aside the orders of RDO and declaring the lands are government lands.” 8. On the face of it, the course of action adopted by the second respondent cannot be countenanced in law. Either on account of lack of experience, or in his anxiety to get as much land as possible to the Government, the second respondent has imported his personal opinion or ambition into the order. He did not realize that he was dealing with an appeal and his duty is only to adjudicate the rights of the contesting parties. In case he wanted to declare the land as that of the Government, the forum was elsewhere. An appeal preferred by the contesting parties cannot provide an avenue for the second respondent to strike a totally different path altogether. 9. Even where it was permissible in an appeal under the Act to go beyond the actual dispute in the proceedings, it was fundamental on the part of the second respondent to have given an opportunity to the parties by framing a point. It is on account of the lopsided approach that the matter get complicated and the disputes remain unresolved for indefinite period. 10. As though the illegality committed on 09.02.2007 was not sufficient, the second respondent proceeded to issue notices to the affected parties through his order, dated 02.03.2007. After the party entered appearance, coolly he passed an order, dated 23.06.2007, which reads as under: “ Perused the file. It appears that Joint Collector has already passed orders vide proceedings F1/6121/2001 dated 09.02.2007. Once the Joint Collector has passed orders, the authority becomes finches official and he no jurisdiction to reopen the matter. The matter has to be set aside only by a superior / appellate authority. As such, the case is already disposed of and no further action is necessary.” 11. The whole episode reflects a sad state of affairs, and immature or improper approach to the vital issue in respect of a valuable land. This Court totally disapproves the procedure adopted by the second respondent. 12. The Writ Petition is accordingly allowed and the order, dated 09.02.2007, is set aside. The matter is remanded to the second respondent for fresh consideration and disposal and he shall ensure that all the contesting parties are issued notices, before the matter is disposed of on merits. There shall be no order as to costs. ___________________ L.NARASIMHA REDDY,J Dated:20.01.2009 GJ