THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY WRIT PETITION No.29922 of 2010 Date: 30.11.2010 Between: Rallabandi (Vadla) Seetharamulu and another ..... Petitioners AND The Government of Andhra Pradesh, rep.by its Principal Secretary (Revenue), Secretariat, Hyderabad and others .....Respondents Counsel for the Petitioners: Sri K.Venkatesh Counsel for Respondents: AGP for Revenue The Court made the following: ORDER: This writ petition is filed for a mandamus to declare the inaction of respondent No.5 in registering the sale deed presented for registration in respect of land admeasuring Ac.0.39 guntas in Survey No.974 of Bhongir Village, Nalgonda District as illegal and arbitrary, and to direct respondent No.3 to grant Occupancy Rights Certificate (ORC). I have heard Sri K.Venkatesh, learned counsel for the petitioners, and perused the record. The petitioners claim that their father was in possession and enjoyment of the above-mentioned land from the year 1954-55 and after his death, they came into possession of the land. It is their further pleaded case that they made an application to respondent Nos.3 and 4 for grant of ORC, that respondent No.4, after holding an enquiry submitted a report to respondent No.3 recommending for grant of ORC on 12.02.2009 and that so far respondent No.3 has not granted ORC. When the petitioners sought to sell the property to a third party and presented a document for this purpose, respondent No.5 refused to receive the same on the ground that they are not the owners of the property. As regards the first limb of the prayer in this writ petition, on the petitioners’ own showing, ORC has not been granted in their favour. Though the petitioners assert that they are in possession of the property, so long as the ownership rights are not conferred on them, they cannot claim to be the owners of the property and consequently, assert their right to alienate the same to third parties. In the absence of ownership and title in the petitioners, they would not have any enforceable right to seek a mandamus to respondent No.5 to accept and register the document. Therefore, this part of the prayer cannot be granted. Coming to the relief of directing respondent No.3 to grant ORC, in the light of the averments made by the petitioners referred to above, respondent No.3 is directed to consider and dispose of the petitioners’ application for grant of ORC in the light of the purported report of respondent No.4, within a period of two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order, after hearing the petitioners. Subject to the above direction, the writ petition is disposed of. As a sequel to disposal of the writ petition, W.P.M.P.No.38108 of 2010 filed by the petitioners for interim relief is disposed of as infructuous. C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY, J Dt.30.11.2010 VGB