HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE R. SUBHASH REDDY Writ Petition No.9243 of 2008 Date: August 3, 2011 Between: Sri Visweswara Swamy Temple, Tunivalasa village, Padmanabha Mandal, Visakhapatnam District, rep. by its Executive Officer … Petitioner And The Chief Commissioner of Land Administration, Nampally Road, Abids, Hyderabad and others … Respondents Order: This writ petition is filed questioning order dated 14.02.2008 passed in proceedings No.V1/520/2005, by the 1st respondent-Chief Commissioner of Land Administration, A.P., Hyderabad. On the claim made by respondents 3 to 6 herein, the Mandal Revenue Officer, Vizianagaram Mandal, passed order dated 01.02.2004 granting Ryotwari Patta in their favour with regard to the lands covered by Sy.Nos.17/2 admeasuring Ac.2.66 cents and 17/3 admeasuring Ac.4.09 cents, situated at Tunivalasa village, Padmanabha Mandal, Visakhapatnam District. Against the said order of the Mandal Revenue Officer, the petitioner carried the matter in appeal before the 2nd respondent-Revenue Divisional Officer under Section 7(2) of the A.P. (A.A.) Inams (Abolition and Conversion into Ryotwari) Act, 1956. The 2nd respondent-RDO allowed the appeal of the petitioner by order dated 26.03.2005 and directed the Mandal Revenue Officer to issue ryotwari patta in favour of the petitioner. As against the same, respondents 3 to 6 filed a revision before the 1st respondent-Chief Commissioner of Land Administration under Section 14-A of the said Act. The revisional authority, by the impugned order, remitted the matter for fresh enquiry by the Mandal Revenue Officer and left open to the parties to file their objections before the Mandal Revenue Officer along with documentary evidence in support of their claim. This writ petition is filed primarily on the ground that against the order of the Revenue Divisional Officer/appellate authority, no revision is maintainable before the Chief Commissioner of Land Administration. A reading of the affidavit filed in support of the writ petition indicates that this writ petition is filed only on the premise that the order dated 26.03.2005 is passed by the Revenue Divisional Officer/appellate authority under the provisions of A.P.Rights in Land and Pattadar Pass Books Act, 1971. It is stated in the affidavit that against the order of the Revenue Divisional Officer dated 26.03.2005, revision lies to the Joint Collector, but not to the Chief Commissioner of Land Administration. A perusal of the orders passed by the Mandal Revenue Officer/primary authority and also the Revenue Divisional Officer/appellate authority makes it clear that the same are not passed under the provisions of the A.P.Rights in Land and Pattadar Pass Books Act, 1971. The order of the Mandal Revenue Officer dated 01.02.2004 is an order granting Ryotwari Patta in favour of respondents 3 to 6 under the provisions of the A.P. (A.A.) Inams (Abolition and Conversion into Ryotwari) Act, 1956. The appeal filed by the petitioner against the said order is under Section 7(2) of the A.P. (A.A.) Inams (Abolition and Conversion into Ryotwari) Act, 1956; in which event, revision is provided under the said statute before the Chief Commissioner of Land Administration. But, when the matter is taken up, it is submitted by Sri V.T.M.Prasad, learned counsel for the petitioner that no valid reasons are assigned by the revisional authority in remitting the matter to the Mandal Revenue Officer. For issuance of Ryotwari Pattas under the provisions of A.P.Rights in Land and Pattadar Pass Books Act, 1971, one should establish that the land in question is an Inam land and should also establish by sufficient evidence that the said land is held as such as on the date of vesting. I have perused the order passed by the Revenue Divisional Officer/appellate authority and also the order passed by the 1st respondent-revisional authority. Without adverting to the relevant questions which arise for consideration for grant of patta under the provisions of the A.P. (Andhra Area) Inams Abolition Act, 1956, the appellate authority allowed the appeal filed by the petitioner herein. The revisional authority has considered the matter in detail, and, as crucial questions were not adverted to by the appellate authority, remanded the matter for fresh consideration by the Mandal Revenue Officer. In view of issuance of patta in favour of respondents 3 to 6 by the primary authority and in absence of any findings on the relevant aspects by the appellate authority allowed the appeal filed by the petitioner, the revisional authority remitted the matter for fresh consideration by the primary authority. In that view of the matter, I see no illegality in the order passed by the revisional authority in remanding the matter for fresh consideration by the primary authority. The writ petition is filed on the premise that order is passed by the Revenue Divisional Officer/appellate authority under the provisions of A.P.Rights in Land and Pattadar Pass Books Act, 1971, which is factually incorrect, and the said order is virtually passed under the provisions of the A.P. (A.A.) Inams (Abolition and Conversion into Ryotwari) Act, 1956. As per Section 14 of the said Act, the Chief Commissioner is empowered to entertain revision against the order of the appellate authority. For the foregoing reasons, no relief as sought can be granted. Writ petition is devoid of merits and is accordingly dismissed. As much as the claim of the parties is pending consideration since a long time, I direct the Mandal Revenue Officer, Vizianagaram, to complete the enquiry within a period of six months from the date of receipt of this order. No order as to costs. ___________________________ (R.SUBHASH REDDY, J) August 3, 2011 MRR