IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) FRIDAY, THE TWENTY SECOND DAY OF AUGUST TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE N.V. RAMANA WRIT PETITION NO : 3503 of 2008 Between: 1 Teegala Narayana Rao @ Narayana Murthy S/o Krishna Mrurthy Pendurthy Village, Pendurthy mandal, Visakhapatnam District. 2 Teegala Sambamurthy S/oLate Krishna Murthy R/o Papayyarjupalem Village, pendurthy Mandal, Visakhapatnam Disstrict. 3 Teegala Seetharamaiah S/o late Chinni Krishna R/o Papayyarijupalem Village, pendurthy Mandal, Visakhapatnam District. ..... PETITIONERS AND 1 The District Collector, Collectorate, Maharanipeta, Visakhapatnam, 2 The Revenue Divisional Officer & Appellate Authority Under the AP Rights in Land & Pttadar Pass books Act, Office of the District Collector, Collecotreate, Maharanipeta, Visakhapatnam. 3 The Tahasildar MRO's Office, Pendurthy Pendurthy Mandal, Visakhapatnam District. ...RESPONDENTS 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 issue a writ or direction, more particularly one in the nature of a Writ of Mandamus, declaring the action of the Second respondent in not signing and delivering up the title deeds pending with him as illegal, motivated, arbitrary, capricious and apart from being violative of the rights guaranteed to the petition under Articles 19 and 300A of the Constitution of India and Command the Second respondent to sign and deliver up the title deeds immediately or within a time to be stipulated by the honourable court and pass such other order or orders as this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper in the circumstances of the case. Counsel for the Petitioners: M/SC.KODANDA RAM Counsel for the Respondents: GP FOR REVENUE The Court made the following : ORDER: It is the case of the petitioners that their grand father late Sri Teegala Sitaramaiah purchased an extent of Ac.5.62 cents of land in R.S.No.26/1 corresponding to old S.No.3 of Krishnarayapuram Village of present Pendurthy Mandal of Visakhapatnam District under two registered sale deeds dt. 29.1.1949 and 9.5.1950 respectively from the Inamdars and since then his family members are in possession and enjoyment of the said lands and after the demise of the grandfather, the petitioners succeeded to the said property. Since the property in question is a part of an Inam Estate, it was taken over by the government on 8.1.1960 under the provisions of the A.P. Estates (Abolition & Conversion into Ryotwari) Act, 1948 (for short ‘the Act’). After noticing that the said property is shown in the revenue records as ‘gayyalu’ and ‘banjar’, the petitioners are stated to have moved the Settlement Oﬃcer, Visakhapatnam for grant of ryotwari patta and ﬁnally after adjudicating the issue, a ryotwari patta was granted in T.A.No.2 of 1980 dated 25.2.1982 and the same has become ﬁnal. However, as the said orders were not implemented, the petitioners are stated to have ﬁled W.P.No.8634 of 1999 before this Court and the said writ petition was allowed by orders dated 2.3.2000 directing the respondents to implement the orders of the Tribunal. The 3rd respondent – Tahsildar Pendurthy is also stated to have ﬁled W.P.No.8634 of 1999 before this Court questioning the orders in TA No.2 of 1980 after a lapse of nearly 18 years and the 2nd respondent – Revenue Divisional Oﬃcer and the appellate authority, preferred an appeal being W.A.No.442 of 2000 against the orders in W.P.No.8634 of 1999. Both the appeal and the writ petitions were heard by a Division Bench of this Court and were disposed of directing the respondents to implement the orders of the Tribunal. Thereafter, it is stated that the petitioners were granted pattadar pass books but were not granted title deeds by the Revenue Divisional Oﬃcer. Therefore, they ﬁled the present writ petition seeking a direction to the Revenue Divisional Oﬃcer to issue title deeds to them. A counter aﬃdavit is ﬁled admitting the factual aspects of the matter. However, it is stated that the Collector addressed the Government on 6.11.2003 seeking permission to ﬁle a Special Leave Petition before the Supreme Court against the judgment of this Court in W.A.No.442 of 2002 and W.P.No.9800 of 2002 and the Advocate on records for the State of Andhra Pradesh at Supreme Court, directed them to furnish cogent explanation for the delay in ﬁling the SLP and a detailed report dated 22.2.2007 was sent to the Advocate explaining the reasons for the delay. A reading of the counter averments show that though the Coll ector intends to ﬁle an SLP before the Supreme Court against the orders in the writ petitions, so far no such petition was preferred and interim orders were obtained by the Government. In the circumstances, it is not proper on the part of the respondents to contend that since they wanted to ﬁle an SLP, they do not want to implement the orders of the Tribunal, which were granted in the year 1982. Hence, the Revenue Divisional Oﬃcer, the 2 nd respondent herein is directed to issue title deeds in respect of the subject matter of land to the petitioners forthwith without any further delay. With the above direction, the writ petition is allowed. No costs. N.V.RAMANA,J Dt.22.8.2008 msv ..... REGISTRAR // TRUE COPY // SECTION OFFICER To 1 The District Collector, Collectorate, Maharanipeta, Visakhapatnam, 2 The Revenue Divisional Officer & Appellate Authority Under the AP Rights in Land & Pttadar Pass books Act, Office of the District Collector, Collecotreate, Maharanipeta, Visakhapatnam. 3 The Tahasildar MRO's Office, Pendurthy Pendurthy Mandal, Visakhapatnam District. 4 2CCs to Govt.Pleader for Revenue, High Court of A.P. Hyderabad 5 2CD copies