HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V. RAMULU WRIT PETITION No. 25653 of 2000 O R D E R: This Writ Petition is filed seeking a Mandamus declaring the proceedings No. F3/25/ROR/98 and F3/71/ROR/98, dated 24th November 2000 passed by the 1st respondent as arbitrary, illegal and against the provisions of the Andhra Pradesh Rights in Land and Pattadar Pass Books Act, 1971 (for short, ‘the 1971 Act’). According to the petitioners, the names of Respondents No. 4 and 5 herein were entered in the revenue records against an extent of Ac.17.00 in Survey No. 931 of Khadirabad Village, Regode Mandal, Medak District. Aggrieved thereby, the petitioners preferred a revision before the Revenue Divisional Officer, Medak, who allowed the revision and directed the authorities to enter the names of the petitioners in the revenue records against the above said land. Therefore, Respondents No. 4 and 5 filed revisions under Section 9 of the 1971 Act before the Joint Collector, Medak at Sangareddy, the 1st respondent herein, who, after a detailed consideration, allowed the same and set aside the order passed by the Revenue Divisional Officer. Hence, the present Writ Petition is filed. The only question raised by the learned counsel for the petitioners is that once the revision is disposed of by the Revenue Divisional Officer, no further revision lies to the Joint Collector and therefore, the 1st respondent has no jurisdiction to entertain the revisions preferred by Respondents No. 4 and 5 and pass orders thereon. In this connection, the learned counsel also relied upon the judgment rendered by a Division Bench of this Court in Manikyamma v. District Revenue Officer[1], wherein it was held that the Collector cannot revise the order passed by the Revenue Divisional Officer, under Section 9 of the 1971 Act, because the power vested in the Collector under Section 9 is available against maintaining of record and against an order passed by the recording authority or appellate authority under Section 3, but not against the order passed by a co- ordinate authority under the same section, which is final and no other provision of law is brought to the notice of the Court by the learned counsel for the respondents to show that the Collector can entertain a revision either as a revision or as an appeal against the order of the Revenue Divisional Officer passed under Section 9 of the 1971 Act. Since the above judgment was rendered in the year 1989, it has no relevance to the fact situation, whereas Section 9, which reads as under: Section 9: The Collector may either suo motu or on an application made to him, call for and examine the record of any Recording Authority, Mandal Revenue Officer or Revenue Divisional Officer under Sections 3, 5, 5-A or 5-B, in respect of any record of rights prepared or maintained to satisfy himself as to the regularity, correctness, legality or propriety of any decision taken, order passed or proceedings made in respect thereof and if it appears to the Collector that any such decision, order or proceedings should be modified, annulled or reversed or remitted for reconsideration, he may pass orders accordingly:- Provided that no such order adversely affecting any person shall be passed under this section unless he had an opportunity of making a representation. as renumbered by Act 9 of 1994, has come into operation with effect from 31st October 1993. A reading of the above provision would indicate that the Collector may either suo motu or on an application made by him call for and examine the records of any Recording Authority, Mandal Revenue Officer or Revenue Divisional Officer under Sections 3, 5 and 5-A or 5-B in respect of any record of rights prepared and maintained to satisfy himself as to the regularity, correctness, legality and priority of the said decision. In view of this, it cannot be said that the Joint Collector has no jurisdiction to entertain the revisions filed by the respondents. Thus, the writ petition is devoid of merit and is liable to be dismissed and it is accordingly dismissed. No costs. --------------------- (C.V. RAMULU, J) 27th July 2009 ksld [1] 1989(1) A.P.L.J 74