The High Court dismissed a writ petition seeking mutation of names in land records for State/Central Government lands. It held the petition misconceived as the ROR Act excludes such lands under Section 12.
Writ petition dismissed; no order as to costs.
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 VILAS V. AFZULPURKAR
WRIT PETITION No.19869 OF 2014
Date:16.07.2014
Between:
Adapa Narayana and others .. Petitioners
And
The Government of Telangana, rep., by its Principal Secretary, Revenue Department, Secretariat Buildings, Hyderabad and others .. Respondents
HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE VILAS V. AFZULPURKAR
WRIT PETITION No.19869 OF 2014
ORDER:
Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned Government Pleader for Revenue (Telangana Area) appearing for respondents 1 to 4.
The petitioners’ request for mutation of their names in the Andhra Pradesh Record of Rights in Land and Pattadar Passbooks Act, 1971 (for short, ‘the ROR Act’) was the subject matter of an appeal before the Revenue Divisional Officer. Under the impugned order, the appeal has been rejected primarily on the ground that under Section 12 of the Act, the State Government lands or the Central Government lands are outside the purview of the Act.
In view of the said provision, the appellate authority could not entertain the petitioners’ appeal. However, that order is questioned in the present writ petition.
While the learned counsel for the petitioner is not able to contradict the legal position with regard to Section 12 of the Act, however, he makes reference to Andhra Pradesh Schedule Areas Land Transfer Regulations and entitlement of the petitioners to the possession. That aspect, in my view, is outside the purview of the present writ petition or the proceedings before the Revenue Divisional Officer. Since the issue involved in the present writ petition is with regard to the relief, if any, can be granted to the petitioners under the
ROR Act and the same having been covered by Section 12 of the Act, the present writ petition is misconceived.
The writ petition is, accordingly, dismissed. There shall be no order as to costs.
The miscellaneous petitions, if any, filed in this writ petition shall stand closed.
____________________________ VILAS V. AFZULPURKAR, J 16.07.2014 KH
2 issues framed by the court
Whether a writ petition for mutation of names under Section 12 of the Andhra Pradesh Record of Rights in Land and Pattadar Passbooks Act is maintainable.
Whether relief can be granted regarding State Government or Central Government lands covered under Section 12.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Adapa Narayana and others
The Government of Telangana
Vilas V. Afzulpurkar
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
