THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE L. NARASIMHA REDDY WRIT PETITION No.5995 of 2004 ORDER: The petitioner feels aggrieved by the action of the first respondent on the basis of the letter dated 1.12.2003 said to have been issued by the second respondent. The matter pertains to the land in S.No.195 of Karmanghat village, Saroor Nagar Mandal. It appears that proceedings, under Section 40 of the A.P. (Telangana Area) Tenancy and Agricultural Lands Act, 1950 (for short ‘the Act’) in relation to the said land are pending before the second respondent for grant of succession. By making reference to an application said to have been made by respondents 3 and 4, the second respondent addressed a letter to the Station House Officer, the first respondent herein, with a request to accord police protection for maintenance of status quo. The petitioner contends that on his verification, it emerged that no order dated 1.12.2003 was passed at all and that the same is fabricated. The second respondent filed counter affidavit. According to the deponent of the counter affidavit, his predecessor passed order dated 12.2003 with an object to ensure status quo in respect of the land. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner. Respondents 3 and 4 did not filed counter affidavit. There is any amount of uncertainty as to the very existence of letter dated 1.12.2003. Even assuming that any such letter was addressed by the second respondent, the same is just untenable. The Mandal Revenue Officer is not conferred with the jurisdiction to pass interim orders while dealing with the applications filed under Section 40 of the Act, much less to address the police officials to accord protection. The proceedings under Section 40 of the Act are confined grant of succession to a deceased protected tenant. If any dispute arises as to the possession over the land, proceedings under Section 32 of the Act have to be initiated, if the claim is against the landlord. On the other hand, if there are inter se disputes, they have to be resolved by having recourse to Civil Court. Hence, the writ petition is allowed and the impugned memo is set aside. It is directed that the first respondent shall not interfere in the matter. There shall be no order as to costs. ________________________ L. NARASIMHA REDDY, J 18th February, 2010 Js.