Telangana High Court
Pannala Srinivas vs The Special Tribunal on 26 April, 2024
Author: B. Vijaysen Reddy
Bench: B. Vijaysen Reddy
HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE B. VIJAYSEN REDDY
WRIT PETITION No.11953 OF 2021
ORDER :
This writ petition is filed by the petitioners challenging the order dated 30.01.2021 passed by respondent No.1 - the Special Tribunal, Yadadri Bhuvanagiri District, in Appeal File No.B/11987/2017 (Special Tribunal Case No.F2/1481/2021), as being illegal, arbitrary, violative of principles of natural justice and without jurisdiction.
2. Heard Mr. Pannala Srinivas, petitioner No.1 - Party-in- Person; learned Government Pleader for respondent Nos.1 to 3 and Mr. A.P. Suresh Ram, learned counsel for respondent Nos.4 to 8, and perused the material on record.
3. Petitioner No.1 - Party-in-Person submitted that Smt. P. Ratnamma, the mother of petitioner Nos.1 and 2, filed application before respondent No.3 - the Tahsildar, Bhongir Mandal, in Case No.B/1198/2017 for correction of revenue records in respect of the land admeasuring Acs.6-23 guntas in Survey No.386 situated at Anajipur Village, Bhongir Mandal, Yadadri Page 2 of 6 WP No.11953 of 2021 Bhuvanagiri District. Respondent No.3 issued Endorsement dated 05.02.2018 directing Smt. P. Ratnamma to approach respondent No.2 - the Revenue Divisional Officer, Bhongir, under Section 5(5) of the Telangana Rights in Land and Pattadar Pass Books Act 1971 (for short 'ROR Act 1971'). Accordingly, Smt. P. Ratnamma preferred appeal before respondent No.2 and the same was allowed by the order dated 21.10.2019 in Case No.D/443/2018 directing correction of revenue records as sought by her. Aggrieved thereby, revision in Case No.F2/3647/2019 was preferred by the unofficial respondents under Section 9 of the ROR Act 1971 before the Joint Collector, Bhongir, which was transferred to respondent No.1 - the Special Tribunal Special Tribunal in terms of Section 16(1) of the Telangana Rights in Land and Pattadar Pass Books Act 2020 (for short 'ROR Act 2020') and renumbered as Case No.F2/1713/2021; and dismissed by the order dated 08.02.2021.
4. Petitioner No.1 - Party-in-Person submitted that surprisingly in the same proceedings another ante-dated order dated 30.01.2021 was passed by respondent No.1 in Appeal File No.B/1198/2017 (Special Tribunal Case No.F2/1481/2021) Page 3 of 6 WP No.11953 of 2021 dismissing the claim of Smt. P. Ratnamma (died, represented by her legal representatives including the petitioners herein), directing them to approach civil Court for declaration of title and recovery of possession. In fact, it is an application for correction of revenue entries which was already disposed of by respondent No.3 by the Endorsement dated 05.02.2018.
5. It is submitted that no such appeal in File No.B/1198/2017 was preferred by the petitioners. Despite the fact that Case No.B/1198/2017 is not an appeal preferred under Section 5(5) of the ROR Act 1971, it is not known as to how this file has been transferred to respondent No.1 and renumbered as Case No.F2/1481/2021. The petitioners never instituted any appeal or revision under Section 5 or 9 of the ROR Act 1971. Thus, the question of transfer of such case to respondent No.1 under Section 16(1) of the ROR Act 2020 does not arise.
6. It is surprising as to how the file in Case No.B/1198/2017 of respondent No.3 was taken up by respondent No.1 and there is no clarity as to whether it was the appeal preferred under Section 5(5) or revision under Section 9 of the ROR Act 1971. Even after Page 4 of 6 WP No.11953 of 2021 hearing the learned Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue, this Court did not get any clarity as to on what basis file in Case No.B/1198/2017 of respondent No.3 was transferred to respondent No.1. However, the record discloses that the said proceeding pertains to the application filed by Smt. P. Ratnamma for correction of revenue entries, as discussed hereinabove.
7. Mr. A.P. Suresh, learned counsel for the unofficial respondents, fairly submitted that Case No.B/1198/2017 on the file of respondent No.3 was the application of Smt. P. Ratnamma for correction of revenue records in respect of the subject land which was already disposed of by the Endorsement dated 05.02.2018 and no such appeal was preferred by her.
8. It is evident from the record that Endorsement dated 05.02.2018 in Case No.B/1198/2017 was challenged by the petitioners (legal representatives of Smt. P. Ratnamma) before respondent No.2 in Case No.D/443/2018 which was allowed by the order dated 21.10.2019. Thereafter, the unofficial respondents preferred revision before the Joint Collector, Bhongir, under Section 9 of the ROR Act 1971 in Case No.F2/3647/2019 which Page 5 of 6 WP No.11953 of 2021 was transferred to respondent No.1 - the Special Tribunal in Case No.F2/1713/2021 and dismissed by the order dated 08.02.2021.
9. It is to be noted that respondent No.1 - the Special Tribunal constituted under Section 16 of the ROR Act 2020 has limited jurisdiction to entertain pending appeals (under Section 5(5) of the ROR Act 1971) and revisions (under Section 9 of the ROR Act 1971). The Proceeding No.B/1198/2017 is neither an appeal nor revision; it was an application filed by the petitioners for correction of revenue records; it was only respondent No.3 - the Tahsildar, Bhongir Mandal, who was having jurisdiction to entertain such an application, and, as noted above, it was disposed of by respondent No.3 by the Endorsement dated 05.02.2018 and the same culminated into the orders of respondent No.2 dated 21.10.2019 and respondent No.1 dated 08.02.2021. Thus, when respondent No.1 - the Special Tribunal does not have any jurisdiction to entertain such an application in File No.B/1198/2017, the question of transferring the same and being taken up by it as an appeal is without application of mind. Hence, this Court does not have any hesitation to hold that the Page 6 of 6 WP No.11953 of 2021 impugned order is non-est, void and was passed without jurisdiction, as such, the same is liable to be set aside.
10. Therefore, the writ petition is allowed and the order dated 30.01.2021 passed by respondent No.1 in Appeal File No.B/1198/2017 (Special Tribunal Case No.F2/1481/2021) is set aside. There shall be no order as to costs.
As a sequel thereto, miscellaneous applications, if any, pending in the writ petition stand closed.
______________________ B. VIJAYSEN REDDY, J April 26, 2024.
MS / PV