IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) PRESENT THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE V. ESWARAIAH WRIT PETITION NO.3378 OF 2005 DATED:24.03.2011 Between: S.K. Ansar and others … Petitioners And The District Collector Visakhapatnam and others … Respondents THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE V. ESWARAIAH WRIT PETITION NO.3378 OF 2005 ORDER: This writ petition is filed seeking a writ of Mandamus to declare the action of the respondents 1 to 4 in not initiating any action on the representation of the petitioners for issuance of revised ryotwari patta in their favour for the property to an extent of Ac.4.05 cents in S.No.25/1 in T.D. No.971 of Jaggarajupeta of Gajuwaka Mandal, Visakhapatnam, as illegal and arbitrary, and consequently to direct the respondents 1 to 4 to issue the ryotwaripatta for the said land, by cancelling the earlier ryotwari patta issued in favour of the petitioners pursuant to the order of the third respondent dt.25.6.2003, in respect of the property in an extent of Ac.4.78 cents in S.No.25/2 in T.D. No.977 of the same village. The petitioners were initially granted ryotwari patta in respect of the land to an extent of Ac.4.78 cents in S. No.25/2 (old Survey No.87/1) of Jaggarajupeta Village of Gajuwaka Mandal, Visakhapatnam, which statedly belong to late father of the petitioners, Shaik Moula, who was the son of S.K. Imam, by order in Inam Case No.1357/2002 dt.25.6.2003 on the file of the Special Deputy Tahsildar (Inams), Visakhapatnam – third respondent herein. The petitioners now claim that the land to an extent of Ac.4.05 cents in S.No.25/1 in T.D. NO.971 of Jaggarajupeta Village belong to them and not the land for which the ryotwari patta was granted and therefore they made a representation dt.4.1.2005 to the respondents 1 to 4 for issuance of revised ryotwari patta by cancelling the earlier patta granted to them. It is the case of the petitioners that the unofficial respondents are interfering with the possession and enjoyment of the property of the petitioners in S. No.25/1 by making a counter claim for ryotwari patta. Hence, the Writ Petition. As the claim of the petitioners herein was allowed in respect of the land to an extent of Ac.4.78 in S. No.25/2 of Jaggarajupeta Village, it cannot be said that the petitioners are aggrieved by the order of the third respondent dt.25.6.2003, and if somebody is interfering with their possession and enjoyment of the petitioners’ property, it is for them to work out their remedies before appropriate forum. Writ Petition is not an appropriate remedy. Further, learned counsel for the impleaded respondents submits that against the orders of the third respondent dt.25.6.2003, the impleaded respondents have filed an appeal before the Revenue Divisional Officer, who has confirmed the order dt.25.6.2003, against which a further appeal was filed before the Chief Commissioner of Land Revenue and the same is pending. If that be so, it is always open for the petitioners to pursue the matter in the said appeal. With the above observations, the writ petition is dismissed. No costs. _______________________ V. ESWARAIAH, J 24.3.2011 bnr