IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) WEDNESDAY, THE EIGHTEENTH DAY OF JUNE TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE N.V. RAMANA WRIT PETITION NO : 12524 of 2008 Between: Katha @ Kasam Sadamani W/o.Pratapreddy Revenue colony, Subedar, Warangal ..... PETITIONER AND 1 The Tahsildar, Huzurabad, Karimnagar District 2 The Revenue Divisional officer, Karimnagar, Karimnagar District 3 The Joint Collector, O/o.District Collector, Karimnagar 4 The Station House officer, Huzurabad, Karimnagar District 5 Smt.Gaddala Rajeswari W/o.Ankoos H.No.16-28, Near Vegetable Market, Huzurabad Post and Mandal, karimnagar 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 an appropriate writ or direcetion particularly in thenature of writ of mandamus declaring the Form-1B (Pattedar Pass Book and title deed) issued by the Tahsildar, Huzurabad, karimnagar District in favour of the 5th respondent bearing No.2238 for Sy.Nos.376/C extent of Ac.0.33 guntas and Sy.No.377/B extent of Ac.0.28 guntas sitauted in Chelpur village, Huzurabad mandal, Karimnagar District is illegal, without jurisdiction and arbitrary and to pass Counsel for the Petitioner:MR.R.KAMESWAR RAO Counsel for the Respondent No.: GP FOR REVENUE The Court made the following : THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE N.V. RAMANA WRIT PETITION NO.12524 OF 2008 ORAL ORDER: The petitioner states that she is the owner and possessor of the lands in Survey No.376/C admeasuring Ac.0.33 guntas and Survey No.377/B admeasuring Ac.0.28 guntas respectively, situated in Chelpur village, Huzurabad Mandal, Karimnagar District, the same having been purchased by her father, namely Kasam Veerareddy, in her name in the year 1972. The petitioner states that she has sold the land in question to one Kondra Komaraiah S/o Rajaiah under an agreement of sale on 22.05.2005 and also put him in possession thereof having received the sale consideration. The petitioner states that on her request, the first respondent- Mandal Revenue Officer, Huzurabad, on 11.05.2006, issued pahanies in respect of the lands in question, but to her surprise, she found that the name of one Gaddala Ankoos, who is the husband of the first respondent herein, was reflected therein. Assailing the said entries, the petitioner states that she preferred appeal to the second respondent- Revenue Divisional Officer, Karimnagar, and the same is numbered as D/492/2006. While things stood thus, the petitioner states that Gaddala Ankoos had also filed appeal before the second respondent in respect of the lands in Survey No.1566/C and 1566/A, against one Kasam Laxmi W/o Veerareddy, with which she is in no way connected. However, the petitioner states that the second respondent, has erroneously clubbed the said appeal with the appeal filed by the petitioner, and passed orders dated 13.09.2006, directing the deletion of the name of the petitioner in the pahanies from the years 1989-90 to 1997-98 in respect of the land in survey No.377/B, and in respect of land in Survey No.377/C, direction was given to the parties to approach the competent Civil Court, for declaration of title. Challenging the said order, the petitioner states that she preferred revision along with stay petition before the third respondent- Joint Collector, Karimnagar, and the third respondent vide orders dated 15.02.2007, passed in D1/4601/2006, has granted stay of the orders passed by the second respondent-Revenue Divisional Officer, and that the main revision is pending before him. While so, she states that the Sub-Inspector of Police, Huzurabad, has called the vendee of the lands in question in the third week of May, 2008 and informed him that as per the orders of the second respondent, the fifth respondent is entitled for the same, and as the fifth respondent sought for police protection, the petitioner was asked not to enter into the lands in question. The main grievance of the petitioner in this writ petition is that while the stay order granted by the third respondent is in force, the first respondent issued Form-1B (Pattadar Passbook and title deeds) in respect of the lands in question in favour of the fifth respondent, which is illegal, arbitrary and without jurisdiction. Heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, the learned Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue for respondent Nos.1 to 3 and the learned Assistant Government Pleader for Home for respondent No.4. The main grievance of the petitioner in this writ petition is that while the stay order granted by the third respondent in the revision filed by him is in force, in flagrant violation of the same, the first respondent issued Form-1B (Pattadar Passbook and title deeds) in respect of the lands in question, in favour of the fifth respondent, which is illegal and arbitrary. If the first respondent in violation of the orders of the third respondent, has issued Form-1B Pattadar Passbook and title deeds), he may bring the same to the notice of the third respondent-Joint Collector by filing an application to that effect in the revision that is pending before him, and if he does not take any action thereon, then he can certainly approach this Court challenging the inaction of the third respondent. The petitioner, without making any such effort, has straight away filed this writ petition seeking relief against a private party, which cannot be granted, and more so when there appears to be disputes between the petitioner and the said private parties. With the above observations, the writ petition is dismissed at the admission stage. No order as to costs. ______________ N.V.RAMANA, J. Date:18.06.2008 VGSR