THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE S.V.BHATT WRIT PETITION No.27880 OF 2010 Date:23.04.2014 Between:
Smt. V.Laxmibai W/o Koteswar Rao, Aged 60 years, Occ: Household, R/o Pokalagudem (v), Chandrugonda (m), Khammam District.
And The Tahsildar, Chandrugonda (m), Chandrugonda, Khammam District and another.
... Petitioner ... Respondents The Court made the following:
ORDER:
The petitioner assails Memo No.M/422/10, dt.24.06.2010 issued by the 1st respondent, as illegal and without jurisdiction.
The impugned memo calls upon the petitioner to produce the title deed and the pattadar passbook (No.478) within 24 hours for taking further action in the matter. The grievance arises under the A.P. Rights in Lands and Pattadar Passbook Act, 1971 (for short ‘the Act’).
It is the case of the petitioner that the 1st respondent after following the procedure and verifying the records, issued pattadar passbook covering total extent of Ac.9.00 cents in survey Nos.82/2/A/A and 82/2/A/A, situated at Pokalagudem Village. If any person interested is aggrieved by either entry in the record of right or issuance of pattadar passbook/title deed, the remedy available to such person is by way of appeal and the 1st respondent has no jurisdiction to summon the pattadar passbook, already issued in the manner indicated, through the impugned memo and review his decision.
The 1st respondent filed counter affidavit. In reply it is stated that the then Tahsildar not only deviated from the procedure stipulated under the Act, but there seems to be collusion in issuing pattadar passbook for total extent of Ac.9.00 cents in favour of petitioner. On realising the mistake, proposals for cancellation of pattadar passbook were sent to the Revenue Divisional Officer, Kothagudem and the writ against impugned memo not maintainable.
I have carefully considered the averments in the counter affidavit and I am of the opinion the petitioner as such does not have grievance to challenge the impugned memo. But there appears to be an error warranting verification by the appropriate authority. Hence with a view to ensure that the recording authority discharged its functions within the four corners of law, the District Collector, Khammam is directed to look into the matter in exercise of his power under Section 9 of the Act and pass appropriate orders. The petitioner is given liberty to submit representation and documents if any, before hand to 1st respondent. The Tahsildar is directed to forward a copy of the recommendations already sent to the Revenue Divisional Officer, Kothagudem within a period of four (04) weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order, to the District Collector along with the copy of this order, who in turn will take up the matter under Section 9 of the Act and pass orders as indicated above.
If it appears to the District Collector that the then Tahsildar either played favourites or colluded with one party or other in issuing pattadar passbook, the District Collector is further directed to take appropriate action against the concerned to meet the ends of justice and instil confidence in the mind of the aggrieved person.
The revision shall be disposed of and necessary action completed within a period of three (03) months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.
With the above directions, the Writ Petition is disposed of. No order as to costs.
Consequently, miscellaneous petitions filed in this writ petition shall stand dismissed.
S.V.BHATT, J 23rd April, 2014.
gra