HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE G.V.SEETHAPATHY CRIMINAL PETITION No.2485 of 2007 ORDER: This Criminal Petition is filed, under Section 482 Cr.P.C., seeking quashing of a direction contained in the footnote of the order dated 22.02.2003 in proceedings No.B/2066/85 on the file of the Mandal Revenue Officer and Executive Magistrate, Zaheerabad, wherein while marking a copy of the said order to the Revenue Inspector, Zaheerabad, he was also directed to serve the order on the concerned person and take possession of the land by conducting proper panchanama under government custody and submit compliance report immediately. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners. None appeared for the respondents. Perused the records. It is stated that the petitioners, who were assigned house site pattas in the year 1987 in Sy.No.275 of Zaheerrabad town, were also put in possession. On a complaint filed by the third person to the District Collector, Medak, the Mandal Revenue Officer was directed to conduct an enquiry. The petitioners filed W.P.No.7509 of 1988 questioning the said proceedings and the said writ petition was disposed of on 11.07.1996 in view of the undertaking given by the respondents that the enquiry would be conducted after issuing notices to the petitioners. Subsequently, the enquiry was conducted by the Mandal Revenue Officer after issuing notices to all the parties concerned and inviting written statements of their respective claims. The petitioners claimed to be in continuous possession and enjoyment of the plots allotted to them in Sy.No.275 of a total extent of Ac.2.31 guntas. The Mandal Revenue Officer passed the impugned proceedings dated 22.02.2003, under Section 145 Cr.P.C., wherein it was held that the claim of actual possession by the petitioners is true. In the said order, the Mandal Revenue Officer further decided and declared that the petitioners are in possession of an extent of Ac.2.31 guntas in Sy.No.275 and are entitled to retain such possession until ousted by due process of law. The said order is, therefore, in favour of the petitioners only. However, while marking the said order to the Revenue Inspector, a direction was given in the footnote of the order directing the Revenue Inspector to serve the order on the concerned and to take possession of the land by conducting proper panchanama under the government custody and submit compliance report immediately. The petitioners are aggrieved by the said direction contained in the footnote of the order. A plain reading of the order shows that the Mandal Revenue Officer has upheld the claim of possession of the petitioners in respect of Ac.2.31 guntas in Sy.No.275 and their possession was so declared also. The question of Revenue Inspector taking possession, conducting proper panchanama under government custody does not, therefore, arise. The said direction contained in the footnote of the order is contrary to the contents of the order itself and, therefore, such a direction is unsustainable as it runs contra to the letter and spirit of the order itself. In the circumstances, the direction to the Revenue Inspector contained in the footnote of the order dated 22.02.2003 is quashed. In the result, the Criminal Petition is disposed of. G.V.SEETHAPATHY,J Date:15.07.2010 Usd