THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE V.V.S.RAO WRIT PETITION No.6036 of 2010 Dated:17.03.2010 Between: D.Kishan Rao, And another. …Petitioners And The Joint Collector and Additional District Magistrate, Mahaboobnagar District, At Mahaboobnagar, And others. ...Respondents THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE V.V.S.RAO WRIT PETITION No.6036 of 2010 ORDER: The first petitioner claims to be owner of land admeasuring Acs.9.05 guntas in survey No.271 situated at Yedira, Hamlet of Appannapally Village in Mahabubnagar District. Second petitioner claims to be owner of land admeasuring Acs.3.21 guntas in survey Nos.942, 943 and 944 situated at Bandamidipally Village of Mahabubnagar District. It appears, respondent Nos.4 and 5 unsuccessfully filed O.S.Nos.21 and 25 of 1985 on the file of the Court of the Senior Civil Judge, Mahabubnagar, for declaration and consequential injunction. The suits were dismissed on 20.07.2006. The fourth respondent filed a petition under Section 9 of the Andhra Pradesh Rights in Land and Pattadar Pass Books Act, 1971 (the Act), for cancellation of the record of rights/mutation in favour of the petitioners. First respondent entertained the revision and while issuing notice to the petitioners and others directed the third respondent not to effect any changes in the revenue records until further orders. Aggrieved by the same, the petitioners filed the instant writ petition seeking a writ of prohibition restraining the first respondent from proceeding with the revision petition under Section 9 of the Act. This Court heard the learned Counsel for the petitioners and the learned Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue (Telangana Area). It is well settled that a writ of prohibition must be issued in rarest of rare cases and unless there is absolute and inherent lack of jurisdiction such a writ cannot be issued. Therefore, indisputably first respondent is the authority to entertain the revision petition and he can call either on an application or suo motu any record receiving an order of recording authority or appellate authority and examine the same with reference to the legality and propriety. As the inherent lack of jurisdiction alleged is not demonstrated, a writ of prohibition cannot be entertained. Therefore, liberty is given to the petitioners to file their explanation/defence statement before the first respondent raising all objections. The first respondent shall consider those objections before passing the orders within a period of three months. The Writ Petition is disposed of accordingly. There shall be no order as to costs. ____________ (V.V.S.RAO, J) 17.03.2010 vs