IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) FRIDAY, THE TWENTY EIGHTH DAY OF MARCH TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE N.V. RAMANA WRIT PETITION NO : 6756 of 2008 Between: Yaramala Nagireddy S/o Yaramala Ramachandra Reddy r/o Venkatapuram (V), G. Konduru (M), Krishna District. ..... PETITIONER AND 1 State of Andhra Pradesh rep by its Principal Secretary to Revenue Department, Secretairat, Saifabad, hyderabad. 2 Tahsildar, G. Konduru Mandal, Krishna District. 3 Lakkireddy Narsireddy S/o narasihareddy 4 lakkireddy Sangireddy S/o narasimhareddy Respondents 3 & 4 are cultivators, R/o Venkatapuram(V), G. Konduru (M), Krishna District. .....RESPONDENTS Petition under Article 226 of the constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the Affidavit filed herein the High Court will be pleased to issue a writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the 2nd respondent in initiating enquiry in RCB No. 149/07 for rectification of Entries in records of rights, without notice and without impleading the petitioner as party respondent thereto as illegal, irregular, arbitrary, without jurisdiction and violative of the Provisions of the Andhra Pradesh rights in land and pattadar Passbooks Act, 1971 rules framed there under and offends articles 14 and 21 of Constitution of India and consequently direct the Respondents to drop proceedings for rectification of entries in record of rights and pass such other orders or order as this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper in the circumstances of the case. Counsel for the Petitioner: MR.NIMMAGADDA SATYANARAYANA Counsel for the Respondents: GP FOR REVENUE The Court made the following : ORDER: It is the case of the petitioner that he is the absolute owner and possessor of the landed property of Ac.0.34 cents out of Ac.12.36 cents covered by R.S.No.145 of Venkatapuram Village having purchased the same under registered sale deed dated 12.2.2007 from one Mettu Krishna Reddy and another. While so, respondents 3 and 4 have filed a suit in O.S.No.66 of 2007 on the file of the Court of the Senior Civil Judge, Nuzvid for perpetual injunction in respect of the said entire extent of Ac.12.36 in R.S.No.145 and the petitioner herein has also filed a written statement. Respondents 3 and 4 have also submitted an application to the Joint Collector, Krishna District at Vijayawada to cancel the pattadar passbooks and title deeds issued in favour of the petitioner’s vendor and another, which was forwarded to the 2nd respondent for enquiry pursuant to which on 1.12.2007 the 2nd respondent initiated enquiry and directed the petitioner’s vendor and another person to appear before him on 6.12.2007. It is also stated that the Special Collector, Vijayawada issued a notice dated 10.12.2007 asking the petitioner’s vendor and another to appear before him on 22.12.2007 for enquiry with all documentary evidence in connection with the application submitted by respondents 3 and 4. Questioning the said action, the petitioner and another person filed W.P.No.411 of 2008 before this Court. By order dated 31.1.2008, this Court stayed the proceedings before the Joint Collector but directed that the proceedings before the 2nd respondent may go on. Pursuant to the said orders, the 2nd respondent issued notice dated 14.3.2008 directing respondents 3 and 4 and the vendor of the petitioner and another to appear before him on 22.3.2008. Since no such notice was issued to the petitioner, he approached the 2nd respondent stating that he is also a person interested and, therefore he may also be given an opportunity to participate in the enquiry. Since the said request was rejected by the 2nd respondent, the present writ petition is filed seeking a direction to the 2nd respondent to drop the proceedings for rectification of entries in record of rights. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner as well as the learned Government Pleader for Revenue and at their request the matter is taken up for final disposal at the admission stage itself. It is contended by the learned counsel for the petitioner that since there is a civil dispute pending between the parties and the petitioner has already filed his written statement, he also should be permitted to participate in the enquiry to safeguard his interest. A reading of the impugned order indicates that the same was issued pursuant to the orders of this Court dated 31.1.2008 in W.P.M.P.No.430 of 2008 in W.P.No.411 of 2008 directing the Tahsildar to complete the enquiry. If the petitioner has a right to participate in the enquiry and he was not issued with a notice, he can challenge such enquiry but he cannot insist the Tahsildar that he should be given a notice and after hearing him only the enquiry should be conducted. That apart, the petitioner has already filed W.P.No.411 of 2008 before this Court and this Court has granted certain directions. The petitioner cannot file the present writ petition seeking directions to stall the proceedings before the Tahsildar, which were initiated as per the directions of this Court. For the foregoing reasons, the writ petition is devoid of merits and it is accordingly dismissed. N.V.RAMANA,J Dt.28.3.2008 msv ..... REGISTRAR // TRUE COPY // SECTION OFFICER To 1 State of Andhra Pradesh rep by its Principal Secretary to Revenue Department, Secretairat, Saifabad, hyderabad. 2 Tahsildar, G. Konduru Mandal, Krishna District. 3 2CCs to G.P. for Revenue, High court of A.P. Hyderabad. 4 2CD copies