IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) WEDNESDAY, THE TWENTY NINTH DAY OF APRIL TWO THOUSAND AND NINE PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE GODA RAGHURAM WRIT PETITION NO : 28248 of 2008 Between: 1 Dr. T.K. Srinivasulu, s/o. Late Kesavulu, Vijaya Nagarjuna Consumers' Welfare Association, Regd. No. 486/2008, R/o. 23-5-465, Lal Darwaza X Roads, Hyderabad - 65. 2 Yarakala Kistaiah, s/o. Late Chandraiah, R/o. 9-35, Musi Road, Nakrekal, Nalgonda District. 3 Mada Venkatesham, S/o. Sailu, R/o. 6-191/B, Dwarakapuri Colony, H.M.T., Chinthal, Hyderabad - 54 ..... PETITIONER(S) AND 1 The Government of Andhra Pradesh, Rep by its Principal Secretary, Revenue Department, Secretariat, Hyderabad. 2 The District Collector, Nalgonda. 3 The Joint Collector, Nalgonda District, Nalgonda. 4 The Revenue Divisional Officer, Nalgonda Division, Nearl Clock Tower, Nalgonda. 5 The Mandal Revenue Officer/Tahsildar, Shaligouraram Mandal, Nalgonda District. 6 The Principal Secretary to Government, Home Department, Secretariat, Hyderabad. 7 The Superintendent of Police, Nalgonda District, Nalgonda. 8 The Station House Officer, Shaligouram Police, Station at Nakrekal, Nalgonda District. 9 The Government of Andhra Pradesh, Rep by its Principal Secretary, Law Department, Secretariat, Hyderabad. 10 The Administrator, Govt. Pleaders' Office, High Court Buildings, Hyderabad. 11 Sri P. Rajagopal Rao, Advocate, Formerly Govt. Pleader for Revenue, H.No. 1-7-139/10, S.R.K. Nagar, Golkonda X Roads, Musheerabad, Hyderabad. 12 Sri M. Venkatram Reddy, Advocate, Flat No. 101, Dream House, Dwaraka Nivas Apartments, Road No. 4, Dwarakapuram, Dilsukhnagar, Hyderabad. 13 Sri E. Lingaiah, Formerly M.R.O., Shaligouraram & Presently workin g as Tahsildar, Gurrampod Mandal, Nalgonda District. 14 Sri Dandempally Papaiah, S/o. Saliu, Bairavunibanda Village, Shaligouraram Mandal, Nalgonda District. 15 Sri Dandempally Yadaiah, S/o. Late Laxmaiah, Thakkellapahad Village, Shaligouraram Mandal, Nalgonda District. 16 Smt. Dasari Yellamma, D/o. Late Sankati, Papaiah & W/o. Gangaiah, Bairavuni Banda Village, Shaligouraram Mandal, Nalgonda District. 17 Smt. Dandempally Laxmamma, w/o. Late Laxmaiah, Thakkellapahad Village, Shaligouraram Mandal, Nalgonda District. 18 Smt. Dandem Pally Padma, W/o. D. Yadaiah, Thakkellapahad Village, Shaligouraram Mandal, Nalgonda District. .....RESPONDENT(S) 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 to issue a writ, order or direction, more particularly a writ of certiorari a) calling for all the records in and connected with mutating of the names of (i) Dandempally Laxmaiah S/o. Sailu and (ii) Dandempally Papaiah, S/o. Sailu with their Duplicate and Wrong father's names as (i) Dandempally Laxmaiah, S/o. Anthaiah and (ii) Dandempally Papaiah, S/o. Anthaiah, in revenue records, i.e. Pahani for the year 1978-79 and subsequent entries in respect of Ac. 22-15 Guntas of Dry land in Sy.Nos 164 & 165 of Thakkellapahad Village, Shaligouraram Mandal, Nalgonda District, on the file of the 5th respondent, i.e. the Tahsildar, and quash the same by declaring as illegal, unauthorized, frauduelnt and as Null and void and consequently to mutate the names of the petitioenrs herein in revenue records and issue Pattadar Pass Books to the petitioners b) to direct the 2nd respondent to cause an enquiry against the 13th respondent who issued BOGUS Pattadar Pass Books to 15 th & 17th Respondents with out entries in the revenue records of the M.R.O. faciliatating them to obtain Bank Loans on the basis of these BOGUS Pass Books and also in all other fraud committee in the office of the 5th respondent c) to direct the 6th respondent to transfer the F.I.R. No. 61/2008 dated 27-9-2008 on the file of the 8th respondent to the Central Crime Station for investigation and further action d) to direct the 9th respondent to file complaint against the former Govt. Pleader for Revenue, Sri Rajagopal Rao, before the Bar Council of AP e) to direct the 1st to 5th and 9th & 10th Respondents to pay an adequate compensation to the 3rd petitioner for all the FRAUD committed against him in the revenue records, Govt. Pleader's Office and before the Hon'ble High Court in the interests of justice and or pass Counsel for the Petitioner:. Counsel for the Respondent No.: GP FOR REVENUE The Court made the following : Oral order: Heard the 1st petitioner party-in-person representing the other petitioners as well. This writ petition is misconceived. The writ petition is filed seeking a Certiorari. The principal grievance is however against the action of the 5th respondent in mutating the revenue records and entering the names of Dandempally Laxmaiah s/o Anthaiah and Dandempally Papaiah s/o Anthaiah in respect of Ac.22-15 guntas of dry land in Sy.Nos. 164 and 165 of Thakkellapahad Village, Shaligouraram Mandal, Nalgonda District, in the revenue records. If the petitioners are aggrieved by the mutation of the above names in the revenue records, by the order of the 5th respondent, they have a remedy by way of an appeal before the Revenue Divisional Officer under Section 5 (5) of the Andhra Pradesh Rights in Land and Pattadar Pass Books Act, 1971 (for short ‘the Act’). Alternatively, if the petitioners are aggrieved by these entries ordered by the 5th respondent, which pejoratively impact any right possessed by the petitioners in respect of the land in question, they may also approach the civil court of competent jurisdiction for appropriate relief including for declaration of their title. This remedy is available in view of the provisions of Section 8 (2) of the Act. In any event, the petitioners, under the guise of this creatively drafted writ petition, cannot seek adjudication of an essentially factual dispute as to the identity of Dandempally Laxmaiah s/o Anthaiah and Dandempally Papaiah s/o Anthaiah. Their remedy is either by way of an appeal to the Revenue Divisional Officer under Section 5 (5) of the Act or to approach the civil court of competent jurisdiction. On the aforesaid analysis, the writ petition is dismissed with liberty to the petitioners to pursue appropriate remedies. No costs. _________________________ GODA RAGHURAM, J 29th April, 2009. GRR