The procedure for obtaining the Revenue records documents in 1980s/1990s is totally different than the present system.

At that time there was NO RTI ACT. If any details are required it is a established practice to submit the details in which occasion required information sought for. Accordingly I approached MRO OFFICE describing the facts that I purchased the land and issue of Pahani Nakal/ and Khasra Pahani on my favor. on my favor means on my name for the purpose of title it implies that change of name in Revenue Records that is the meaning of Application. Accordingly Affidavit and Copy of sale deed enclosed and submitted in the office of MRO,PATANCHERU SEEKING FOR NEEDFUL ACTION. I never approached for simple nakal copies from MRO OFFICE. Because I already inspected the documents and purchased the land and registered on my name. Particularly I requested Pahani of 1984-85 in that year I purchased the land and requested to effect my name in revenue records. So that my name will appear from the date of purchase. My application lied in MRO,PATANCHERU OFFICE for 9-12-19988,1012-1988,11-12-88,12-12-1988and 13-12-1988 and on 14-12-1988 THEY RELEASED ME TWO DOCUMENTS giving reference dated of my application dt9-12-1988 and for the both the documents referred with Nos., F/867/88. As per Pahani SUNKARI MALLAIH IS the holder of the land he

is pattadar and in Pahani no where mentioned it is Assigned Land and it is defined as ENAGADDA PATTA it is very much clear by DEFINING Enagadda patta it never goes for any other patta land like lavoni patta or Inam or some other Assigned Land. Such copy issued to Smt., EMANI NAGA VIJAYA KUMARI. For Khasra Pahani I have been informed by separate letter stating that can not be given because It has old number and I applied new number according to MRO OFFICE. But they never objected on the category of particular land belongs to Govt., Land or Assigned Land. To the best of my Knowledge and assurance of Revenue office my name will be effected in Revenue records updating but it will take some other formalities of their departmental which never concentrated to know what they do? How they do ? When they do? I thought it is my obligation and responsibility to inform revenue office about my purchase of land and asking my name in revenue registers for that I projected the documents what I have and they have replied me and assured my status win revenue records will be taken care. I have provided my address also to them. From that date to till the date I approached my self on my land I never get any objection from Revenue authority. Revenue authority given his objection when I filed WP and CC through court.

As I never get/receive any objection from Revenue department my status and title has perfected as per LIMITATIONS ACT 1963 provisions. Here I take the support of SUPREME COURT JUDGEMNTS where in they quoted The law of limitation undoubtedly binds everybody including the Government. If at all any objection they would have given me show cause notice or they would have informed me. In addition to above about 329 survey number govt., land they informed SUB REGISTARAR SANGAREDDY only on 9-1-2006 bearing nos B/4763/2006 not to do any transactions on survey number 329 with out NOC from RDO. For my case the department is fully aware that I purchased the land and they have to regularize the issue for that number 329 classified as ASSIGNED LANDS by different list in that list also SUNKARI they never bothered. In addition they have mentioned which nos in survey MALLAIH LAND NEVER PROJECTED. In the WRIT PETITION PROCEEDINGS 1227/1228 ,A COPY OF THE REVENUE Dept order (MRO) shows survey numbrer329/43 was not in the list prepared by revenue department. Regarding survey numbers 329/25 and 329/27 the material papers filed in these writs show these survey numbers are not assigned lands. Survey number 329/45 declared by Revenue authorities confirms it is not assigned land. Hence it is quite evident that 329/43 is not Assigned Land Further according to Tahasildar ,Patancheru office letter number C/7038/2011 DT 22-11-2011 he could not trace out PATTA

CERTIFICATE issued to Sri Sunkari Mallaih As per Tahasildar,Patancheru letter Number C/7038/2011 DT 13-02-2012 the subject land of 329/43 not allotted to ANDHRAPRADESH GURUKULA VIDYA PATAHSALA . But as per earlier report of Patancheru Mandal Tahasildar report the subject land was allotted to GURUKULA VIDYA PATHASAL and peace fully enjoying taking wrong possession of my land into their Associated school Bealluh school premises play grounds. Such activity immediately be stooped and get vacated by Gurukula vidya Pathasala . I should be paid all compensations by school authority and revenue authority for giving a severe stress to get verified all.
the Supreme Court held that condonation of delay is an exception and should not be used as an anticipated benefit for government departments. The law of limitation binds everybody including the Government the Department miserably failed to give any acceptable and cogent reasons sufficient to condone such a huge delay appeals dismissed on the ground of delay no costs.