THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE B.PRAKASH RAO AND THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE R.KANTHA RAO WRIT APPEAL No.856 of 2008 JUDGMENT: (PER Hon’ble Sri Justice B.Prakash Rao) Heard Sri O.Manohar Reddy, learned counsel for the appellant and the learned Government Pleader for Revenue and at their request the main appeal itself is taken up for disposal. The appellant is the writ petitioner, who seeks to assail the order dated 1-12-2006 of the learned Single Judge dismissing the writ petition in WP.No.25035 of 2006. In the writ petition, the petitioner sought for a Writ of Certiorari inter alia assailing the orders passed by the 1st respondent in Case No.F1/1051/2001, dated 12-4-2005 dismissing the appeal filed by the petitioner as against the orders arising out of grant of occupancy certificate under the provisions of the Andhra Pradesh (Telangana Area) Abolition of Inams Act, 1955. Briefly stated, the facts of the case are that the appellant herein claims to be the owner and pattedar of the land in question. However, having regard to the fact that certain occupancy rights were recognized by the competent authority viz., respondent No.2 as per the orders dated 18-2-2000 granting in favour of 3rd parties, the appellant had filed a regular appeal before the appellate authority viz., respondent No.1 therein. However, during the course of hearing the appeal, since it is pointed out that the land belongs to the government, the said appeal was dismissed, hence the writ petition. Learned Single Judge, apart from taking into consideration as to the claim of the government and the fact that the appellant had filed a suit in O.S.No.122 of 1969, on the file of the Munsif Magistrate (East and North), Ranga Reddy District, which was disposed of, against which on appeal the matter was remanded to the trial Court and the same is pending, disposed of the writ petition observing that the court is not inclined to interfere with the matter, especially, when the petitioner therein does not claim any occupancy rights certificate, hence the appeal. Having heard the learned counsel on either side and on perusal of the material on record, it transpires that admittedly the appellant claims to be the owner of the lands in question and it is only when an occupancy rights certificate was granted in favour of the 3rd parties under certain provisions of the aforesaid Act by the 2nd respondent, it was opposed by way of an appeal by the appellant before the respondent No.1, and since it was brought out to the notice of the respondent No.1 that the land belongs to the government, the appeal was dismissed. However, it is also to be noted that the suit OS.No.122 of 1969 was disposed of long back some time in the year 1981, and therefore, nothing is pending and the question of such occupancy rights does not come in the way of the appellant herein pursuant to the aforesaid decision. Be that as it may, the said statute being a special social welfare legislation and since certain rights have been recognized therein, necessarily, the same has to be assailed in the manner in which it has been provided for under the remedies contemplated therein. That apart the claim of the government that it is a government land is totally erroneous and unsustainable inasmuch as it is an Inam land and certain occupancy rights have been granted. The only question to consider is as to whether such grant of occupancy rights is correct or not. This question has to be gone into in the said appeal vis- à-vis the claim by the appellant as to the owner and pattedar and possessor, and that apart, having regard to the fact that the suit has been already disposed of there is no impediment in disposing the said appeal. The writ appeal is accordingly allowed. The order of the learned Single Judge dated 01-12-2006 passed in W.P.No.25035 of 2006 and the order of the 1st respondent dated 12-4-2005 in Case No.F1/1051/2001 dismissing the appeal are set aside and the matter is remitted back to the respondent No.1. The respondent No.1 after giving due notice and opportunity to both the parties, shall dispose of the appeal, in accordance with law, as expeditiously as possible not later than three months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. No costs. ___________________ (B.PRAKASH RAO,J) __________________ (R.KANTHA RAO,J) Date: 22-10-2008 Grk THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE B.PRAKASH RAO AND THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE R.KANTHA RAO (The Judgment of the Bench delivered by the Hon’ble Sri Justice B.Prakash Rao) WP.12813 OF 2008 Dated:22-10-2008