The Court directed a Joint Collector-cum-Settlement Officer to receive the petitioner's application to implead herself in pending estate abolition proceedings initiated by a third party.
The petitioner's application was directed to be received by the Joint Collector and sent to the Tahsildar for enquiry and report.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V.RAMULU
W. P. NO. 17681 of 2009
TH TUESDAY THE 2 5 DAY OF AUGUST, 2009
Between: Chandramma ..... PETITIONER AND The District Collector Chittoor, Chittoor District And four others .....RESPONDENT(S)
O R D E R:-
The petitioner asserts that she is the absolute owner and possessor of the land in an extent of Ac.4.96 cents in Sy.No.267/1, situated in Thumpayanapalle village, Bangarupalyam Mandal, Chittoor District, having succeeded the same from her mother-in-law, Bhavyamma, under a registered Will Deed dated 18.09.1987. While so, one Ramchandra Reddy, who is the father-in-law of the 5th respondent, filed an application vide SR.No.12/11(A)/59/2000 before the 2nd respondentJoint Collector-cum-Settlement Officer under Section 11(a) of Estate Abolition Act, 1956 for mutation of his name in the revenue records illegally in respect of the property in question. Then, the petitioner filed some objections by way of an application in S.R.No.12/11(A)/59/2000 requesting the 2nd respondent to issue necessary orders for enquiry and report, but her grievance is that the 2nd respondent refused to receive her application and the 5th respondent is trying to interfere with the petitioner’s possession of the property in question, and obtain pattedar passbook and title deeds and also get the petitioner’s name mutated in the revenue records in her favour illegally. Hence, the petitioner filed the present writ petition seeking appropriate directions.
Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Government Pleader for Revenue appearing for respondent Nos.1 to 4. Having regard to the specific averments made in the affidavit filed in support of the writ petition, this Court, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, is inclined to dispose of the writ petition with the following directions:
“The 2nd respondent-Joint Collector-cum-Settlement Officer is directed to receive the application purported to have been filed by
the petitioner for impleading herself as a party to the proceedings in SR.No.12/11(A)/59/2000 pending before him, and send the same to the 4th respondent-Tahsildar, for enquiry and report, in accordance with law.”
Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of. No costs.
______________ C.V.RAMULU, J 25th August, 2009 Note: Furnish copy in one week B/o bcj
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the Joint Collector-cum-Settlement Officer is directed to receive the petitioner's application to implead herself in pending mutation proceedings.
Whether the petition for directions regarding the initiation of enquiry in the mutation application requires disposal without merit evaluation.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Chandramma
The District Collector Chittoor
Five others (Joint Collector, Tahsildar, etc.)
C.V. Ramulu
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
