Document Fragment View
Fragment Information
Showing contexts for: ror act in D.Sudhakar Reddy vs The Joint Collector on 1 September, 2020Matching Fragments
The present writ petition is filed by the petitioners aggrieved by the Orders of Joint Collector passed in file No.F3/5382/2007-F3/36/ROR/2007, dated 26.06.2008, whereby the learned Joint Collector has set aside the Order of the Revenue Divisional Officer, Sangareddy, (in short, 'R.D.O.'), in file No.A3/2385/05, dated 31.05.2007.
2. The brief facts of the case are that the writ petitioners who claim to be the legal heirs of one Sri Ranga Reddy, the original owner and pattedar of the land in Sy.No.15, admeasuring Acs.18.01 gts., situated at Osman Nagar Village, Ramachandrapur Mandal, Medak District. The said Sri Ranga Reddy was survived by a son - Hanmanth Reddy, and after the death of Hanmanth Reddy, the property devolved on the writ petitioners as well as respondents No.5 to 9. On verification of the revenue records, Sy.No.15 was sub-divided into Sy.No.15/E for an extent of Acs.5.20 gts., and the name of the respondent No.4 herein was incorporated in pattadar as well as possessor columns. The further case of the petitioners is that no notice was issued to the petitioners nor any enquiry was conducted by the M.R.O., before incorporating the name of the respondent No.4 herein i.e. G.Laxma Reddy in the revenue records and the same is 2 AAR,J without any legal basis, contrary to the provisions of the A.P. Rights in Land and Pattedar Passbook Act, 1971 (in short, 'ROR Act'), and therefore, the same is non est in the eye of law.
4. The R.D.O., after perusing the record, has allowed the appeal filed by the petitioners herein and set aside the order of the M.R.O. granting mutation in favour of the respondent No.4 herein and directed the M.R.O. to delete the entries made in favour of the respondent No.4 from the year 1990-91 onwards. Aggrieved by the said orders of the R.D.O., in file No.A3/2385/05, dated 31.05.2007, the respondent No.4 herein preferred a revision before the Joint Collector under Section 9 of the A.P. Rights in Land and Pattedar Passbook Act, 1971 (in short, 'ROR Act'). The learned Joint Collector, after perusing the material on record and hearing the parties, has allowed the revision and held as under:
7. Heard Sri E.Madan Mohan Rao, the learned Counsel appearing on behalf of Sri A.Parsa Ananth Nageswar Rao, the learned Counsel for the petitioners, learned Government Pleader for Revenue appearing for respondents No.1 to 3 and Sri N.Saida Rao, learned Counsel appearing for the respondent Nos.4 to 9.
8. In order to properly appreciate the facts of the case, it is necessary to extract the relevant provisions of the ROR Act.
9. As per the provisions of the ROR Act, Section 4 mandates that any person acquiring by succession, survivorship, inheritance, partition, Government patta, decree of a court or otherwise any right as owner, pattadar, mortgagee, occupant or tenant of a land and any person acquiring any right as occupant of a land by any other method shall intimate in writing his acquisition of such right, to the Mandal Revenue Officer (Tahsildar) within ninety days from the date of such acquisition. On receipt of such intimation under Section 4, the Mandal Revenue Officer is bound to amend the ROR by issuing notice to all persons whose names are entered in the record in writing and who are interested in or affected by the amendment and to any other persons whom he has reason to believe to be interested 8 AAR,J therein or affected thereby to show cause within the period specified therein as to why the amendment should not be carried out. Thereafter, after passing of such order under Section 5 (3), the same shall be communicated to all the persons concerned under Section 5 (4) of the ROR Act. Against the order passed by the Mandal Revenue Officer, making or refusing to make such amendment, a statutory remedy of appeal is provided to the concerned Revenue Divisional Officer within a period of 60 days from the date of communication of the order under Section 5 (5) of the ROR Act.
10. Section 5-A deals with regularization of alienation or transfer of lands effected otherwise than by registered document by the concerned Mandal Revenue Officer after putting the concerned person on notice. The time period for such regulation is being extended from time to time by the government. Against the orders of the Revenue Divisional Officer, the Revision under Section 9 of the ROR Act lies to the Collector. Section 8 (2) provides a relief to the person aggrieved for filing a civil suit before the competent civil Court to declare that against any entries made in the revenue record which he is in possession of and if the said suit is decreed, the findings of the civil Court are binding on the revenue authorities and they are bound to amend the ROR accordingly. The Rules made under Section 11 (1) of the ROR 9 AAR,J Act prescribes an elaborate procedure wherein the revenue officials are mandatorily bound to issue the notice before passing any orders in the prescribed form.