THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE N.V. RAMANA W.P. No. 22560 of 2008 O r d e r: Petitioner No.1 claims that he is the owner of the land in question in an extent of Ac. 1-32 guntas in Sy. No. 494, Attapur village, Rajendranagar Tahsil, Ranga Reddy District, having succeeded to the same from his father, namely Late Sri Anantha Chara, who was given by Sarf-e- khas Mubarak, on nozool. That the name of his father was also mutated in the revenue record, by the then Tahsildar, Hyderabad West in File No. 176/5, dated 5th Khurdad 1357 Fasli. He entered into an agreement of sale in respect of the said land with petitioner No.2. As the entries in the revenue records were changed and recorded in the revenue records against the land in question as Sarkari, Lawaris, Wakf, Deval Anantha Swamy, the petitioners ﬁled a petitioner under Section 9 of the A.P. Rights in Land and Pattedar Pass Book Act, 1971 before respondent No.1, namely the Joint Collector, Ranga Reddy District, who has taken the same on ﬁle as Case No. D5/2343/2003. He states that ﬁled protected tenancy certiﬁcate as also the list of endowed properties given by the Assistant Commissioner of Endowments and original revenue receipt dated 15.08.1998 to show that himself and prior to him, his father was in possession of the land. However, respondent No.1 upon hearing the counsel for the petitioners, by the order dated 11.06.2005, impugned in this writ petition, dismissed the petition of the petitioners for change/correction of entries in the revenue records. The learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that the land in question was given to the father of petitioner No.1, namely Late Anantha Chary, by Sarf-e-khas Mubarak, on nuzool, and on his request, his name was also recorded in the revenue records. However, from the year, 1960-61, the entries in the revenue records, were recorded in the revenue records as Sarkari, Lawaris, Wakf, Deval Anantha Swamy. He submitted that to show that petitioner No.1 and prior to him, his father were in possession of the land in question, he ﬁled protected tenancy certiﬁcate and list of endowed properties given by the Assistant Commissioner of Endowments and Original Revenue receipt dated 15.08.1998, but respondent No.1 without giving any credence to the said documents, passed the impugned order, dismissing the petition ﬁled by the petitioners for change/correction of entries in the revenue records, which is illegal and arbitrary. Hence, he prayed that the impugned order be set aside and the writ petition be allowed, and consequently respondent No.1 be directed to change/correct the entries in the revenue records as prayed for. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue for the respondents. As can be seen from the prayer of the petitioners, as well as the order impugned in the writ petition, petitioner No.1 has sought change/correction of entries in the revenue records right from the year 1960-61. Petitioner No.1, admittedly, made such a request after lapse of nearly 45 years. Respondent No.1, before passing the impugned order, in fact, had called for a report from the Mandal Revenue Oﬃcer, Rajendranagar, who having conducted a detailed enquiry, reported that the land in an extent of Ac. 1-32 guntas in Sy. No. 494, Attapur village, Rajendranagar, is recorded as Sarkar Sariakhas Suluch in the patta column and occupant column is blank in 1353 Fasli (1944), 1359 Fasli and 1954-55, and it continued as Sarkari, Lawaris, Sarkari, Deval Anantha Swamy. That the orders, namely 5th Khurdar 1357 Fasli in File No. 176/2005 under which, the name of the father of petitioner No.1, were said to have mutated, are not reﬂected in the revenue record. That the name of petitioner No.1 is not reﬂected in the revenue record. Though the lands are recorded as such, in the revenue records, since 1960, the fact remains, no explanation is given by petitioner No.1 for not taking any steps to get the said alleged wrong entries in the revenue records changed/corrected, at an earlier point of time, and on the other hand, it is his admitted case, that none of his predecessors have made any attempt to get the same changed/rectified. In that view of the matter, no exception can be taken to the order passed by respondent No.1, dismissing the petition ﬁled by petitioners seeking to change/correct the entries in the revenue records, and more so when in the enquiry report called for by him, it was found by the Mandal Revenue Oﬃcer, Rajendranagar, that the land in question is recorded as Sarkari, Lawaris, Sarkari, Deval Anantha Swamy. This apart, though the impugned order was passed by respondent No.1, as far back as on 11.06.2005, the petitioners have ﬁled this writ petition, after lapse of nearly three years. The writ petition is devoid of merit, and the same is accordingly dismissed. No costs. _________________ N.V. RAMANA, J. Dated: 04th November, 2008. KSR