THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE V.V.S.RAO Writ Petition No.15055 of 2002 ORDER Petitioner impugnes order of Revenue Divisional Officer, Sangareddy in case No.A3/1586/1999 dated 04.03.2002. In exercise of powers under Section 5(5) of the Andhra Pradesh Right in Land and Pattadar Passbooks Act, 1971, (‘the Act’, for brevity), Revenue Divisional Officer, Sangareddy allowed appeal filed by fourth respondent directing second respondent to restore entries in revenue records in favour of fourth respondent. Petitioner purchased an extent of Acs.2.00 (out of Acs.6.15 gts) in Survey No.212/2 (new Survey No.221) of Ramachandrapuram Village and Mandal, Medak District from Smt.Mary Fatima, under agreement of sale dated 03.03.1989. He also filed O.S.No.56 of 1992 on the file of Court of Subordinate Judge, Sangareddy for specific performance of agreement of sale. Same was decreed on 29.07.1997. Petitioner, then made an application to Mandal Revenue Officer, Ramachandrapuram Mandal, Medak District seeking mutation, in accordance with provisions of the Act. Mandal Revenue Officer, Ramachandrapuram Mandal, Medak District, by proceedings dated 18.08.1997, directed mutation of entries in favour of petitioner. Fourth respondent is a Government of India undertaking. Claiming that land in Survey No.221 was acquired for it, they preferred appeal before Revenue Divisional Officer, Sangareddy, against order of Mandal Revenue Officer, Ramachandrapuram Mandal, Medak District. Revenue Divisional Officer, Sangareddy has given notices to petitioner and having come to conclusion that revenue entries show that land belongs to fourth respondent, ordered registration of entries in favour of fourth respondent. Counter affidavit has been filed by fourth respondent giving details of acquisition of land in 1960s. This Court heard learned counsel for petitioner and learned Government Pleader for Revenue and learned standing counsel for fourth respondent. Learned counsel for fourth respondent does not dispute that a remedy of revision under Section 9 of the Act is available to petitioner against orders passed by the Revenue Divisional Officer, Sangareddy. Remedy has not been filed and petitioner approached this Court directly. Having regard to fact that petitioner obtained an ex parte decree of specific performance of agreement of sale and then got mutation in his favour in respect of land claimed by fourth respondent, it is appropriate that petitioner may first file remedy of revision. In such an event, Joint Collector, Medak at Sangareddy shall entertain revision and pass appropriate orders in accordance with law, after giving notice to fourth respondent. The writ petition is accordingly disposed of and parties shall maintain status quo as on today. Three weeks time from today is given to petitioner to prefer revision. The Joint Collector, Medak at Sangareddy may dispose of revision within a period of three months thereafter. There shall be no order as to costs. _______________ (V.V.S.RAO, J) August 07, 2009 Bvv