IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) MONDAY, THE TWENTY THIRD DAY OF JUNE TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY WRIT PETITION NO : 16128 of 2005 Between: 1 Ravi S/o. Narayana Rao R/o. Zaheerabad Town and Mandal, Medak District, 2 Anil S/o./ Dwaraka R/o. Zaheerabad Town and Mandal, Medak District, 3 Chandraiah S/o. Shivraj R/o. Zaheerabad Town and Mandal, Medak District, ..... PETITIONERS AND 1 The District Collector, Medak District, at Sangareddy, 2 The Revenue Divisional Officer, Sangareddy, Medak District, 3 The Mandal Revenue Officer, Zaheerabad Mandal, Medak District, 4 The Secretary, Bhoodan Yagna Board, Andhra Pradesh, Gandhi Bhavan, Hyderabad, ....RESPONDENTS Counsel for the Petitioner:MR.RAJ KUMAR RUDRA Counsel for the Respondents: GP FOR REVENUE The Court made the following : O R D E R: At the interlocutory stage, the writ petition itself is taken up for hearing and disposal with the consent of the learned counsel for the parties. This writ petition is filed for a Writ of Mandamus to declare the action of respondents 1 to 3 in not issuing D-form pattas to the petitioners in respect of the land allotted in their favour by respondent No.4 in Survey Nos.341 and 342 of Zaheerabad Village and Mandal, Medak District as illegal, arbitrary and contrary to the provisions of the Andhra Pradesh Bhoodan and Gramdan Act, 1965 (for short ‘the Act’). Heard the learned counsel for the parties and perused the record. It is not in dispute that the petitioners, who are landless poor persons, approached respondent No.4 for allotment of the lands in their occupation. Their request was acceded to vide proceedings dated 04-10-2002 and lands were allotted in their favour after collecting a sum of Rs.1,750/- from each of the petitioners. Consequently, respondent No.4 addressed letter dated 04-10-2002 to respondent No.3 for grant of pattas in the prescribed form in the names of the petitioners as required under Rule 9 of the Andhra Pradesh Bhoodan and Gramdan Rules, 1965 by incorporating the necessary conditions and a copy of the said letter was marked to respondent No.2. The petitioners claimed that respondent No.3 sent proposals to respondent No.1, who vide letter dated 27-11-2002 sought for certain clarifications from respondent No.4 and that respondent No.4 in response to the said letter issued clarifications in his letter dated 13- 12-2002 and requested respondent No.1 to accord proposals to enable respondent No.3 to issue pattas. It is alleged that in pursuance of the said request, respondent No.1 issued instructions to respondent No.3 to implement the decision of respondent No.4 by issuing D-form pattas and making necessary entries in the Revenue records. The grievance of the petitioners is that, respondent No.3 has not taken the follow up action and hence, they filed the present writ petition. No counter-affidavit has been filed by any of the respondents. In the absence of the denial of averments contained in the affidavit, and on the basis of the material produced by the petitioners supporting the said averments, I have no hesitation to accept the facts stated by the petitioners as true and correct. The act of granting pattas and incorporating the names of the allottees under the Act is merely procedural, once the substantive power of allotment vested in respondent No.4 is exercised by him. I do not, therefore, see any justification whatsoever for respondent No.3 in not granting the pattas though he was directed to do so by respondents 1 and 2. Hence, the writ petition is allowed. Respondent No.3 is directed to issue D-form pattas in favour of the petitioners in pursuance of the allotments made by respondent No.4 and make necessary entries in the Revenue records in favour of the petitioners within a period of four (4) weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY,J Dated 23rd June, 2008 vrn