HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE V.ESWARAIAH W.P.NO.16322 OF 1999 DT.22.7.2010 Between: Chukka Rambabu Reddy ..Petitioner And The Commissioner, Survey, Settlements & Land Records, Hyderabad and others ..Respondents HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE V.ESWARAIAH W.P.NO.16322 OF 1999 ORDER: Petitioner questions the order of the Commissioner, Survey, Settlements and Land Records, Andhra Pradesh, Hyderabad, in Case No.L1/213/95, dated 13.7.1998, as illegal and to quash the same. Heard both the learned counsel. The Settlement Officer, Rajahmundry, took up suo motu enquiry under Section 9 for grant of ryotwari patta in respect of Sy.Nos.4/5, 6, 8, 14, 7 & 16 admeasuring Hc.0.14, 0.18, 3.52, 7.19, 1.64 and 6.28 respectively situated at Lakshminagaram village in erstwhile Bhadrachalam Taluk of Khammam District in respect of Gudla Bullemma @ Burgulamma w/o.Venkata Sreeramulu, mother of the 5th respondent herein. The Settlement Officer examined the claim of the said Gudla Bullemma under the second proviso to Section 17(1) of Regulation 2 of 1970 and necessary notices have been published in the village as required under Rules framed under the said Regulation. The said Gudla Bullemma was not a tribal. The record of the enquiry shows that Gudla Lakshmaiah, father-in-law of the said Bullemma was given a patta by the Deputy Collector (Agency Division), Godavari Agency, Bhadrachalam on 28.1.1903 for an extent of Ac.32.00. As per records, the said Bullemma also filed tax receipts. It is stated that after the death of her father-in-law, the property was devolved on his son, namely, Venkata Sreeramulu, the husband of Bullemma and that land covered by the said patta correlates to Sy.Nos.4/5, 6, 8 and 14 and the land covered by the remaining Sy.Nos.7 and 16 is stated as excess over the patta land for which the said Bullemma is not entitled. Accordingly, the claim of the said Bullemma in respect of Sy.Nos.4/5, 6, 8 and 14 was allowed granting ryotwari patta and her claim in respect of remaining Sy.Nos.7 and 16 was disallowed vide order dated 20.9.1976. Against the said order, Gudla Bullemma alone filed an appeal in A.P.No.222 of 1980 before the Director of Settlements, Andhra Pradesh, Hyderabad, under Section 9(3) of Regulation No.2 of 1970 claiming patta in respect of the remaining schedule land. The Director of Settlements vide order dated 15.3.1983 directed to grant ryotwari patta in respect of the remaining two survey numbers i.e., Sy.Nos.7 and 16 to an extent of H.A.1.64 and 6.28 respectively also. Thereafter, the petitioner herein filed an appeal before the Director of Settlements, Andhra Pradesh, Hyderabad against the orders passed by the then Settlement Officer, Rajahmundry, in Case No.3715, dated 20.9.1976, on 14.4.1990 i.e, after a period of 14 years. The said appeal was dismissed as not maintainable vide order dated 16.2.1995 on the ground that the Director of Settlement had already exercised his appellate powers against the order of the Settlement Officer in A.P.No.222/80, dated 15.3.1983, and hence the appellate authority has become functus officio and he has no power to revise the earlier orders passed by the Director of Settlement and the order of the Settlement Offic e r, Rajahmundry was merged in the order in A.P.No.222/80, dated 15.3.1983. It is also stated that the appeal is filed with an abnormal delay of 14 years and therefore the appeal cannot be considered for admission and accordingly dismissed the appeal. Aggrieved by the same, the petitioner herein filed a further appeal in Case No.L1/213/95 before the Commissioner, Survey, Settlements and Land Records, Andhra Pradesh, Hyderabad. After considering the contentions of the petitioner with regard to the alleged illegal grant of ryotwari patta in favour of the mother of the 5th respondent with reference to the records and documents, the Commissioner, Survey, Settlements and Land Records dismissed the appeal vide orders dated 13.7.1998 on the ground that the petitioner has failed to establish his contention with regard to the possession of the said land by Chukka Appalaswamy Reddy and Chukka Narasimha Reddy from 1931 onwards and the petitioner has failed to adduce any evidence in support of his contention. The petitioner also failed to substantiate his contention with regard to the alleged partition in 1956 and the said property said to have been fallen to the share of Chukka Appalaswamy Reddy and Chukka Narasimha Reddy. The petitioner also failed to adduce any evidence or material to show that the said Gudla Bullemma is not the legal heir of Gudla Laxmaiah and Gudla Venkamma, who were original pattadars. The Commissioner, Survey, Settlements and Land Records further held that the petitioner has not made any claim pursuant to Regulation No.2 of 1970 up to 1990 before the Settlement Officer and no documentary evidence relating to the grant of patta in favour of his ancestors has been filed and the petitioner has failed to rebut the allegations and the documents filed by the mother of the 5th respondent. The petitioner also failed to establish any right entitle him for grant of ryotwari patta. The appeal was considered on merits and accordingly dismissed. To rebut the said findings recorded by the Commissioner, Survey, Settlements and Land Records, the petitioner has not filed any material before this Court also. Therefore, it cannot be said that the grant of ryotwari patta in favour of mother of the 5th respondent is illegal. The writ petition is without any merit and the same is accordingly dismissed. No order as to costs. _________________ V.ESWARAIAH, J. 22.7.2010 kpr