HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE R. SUBHASH REDDY Writ Petition No.21944 of 2002 Date: April 11, 2011 Between: Pathan Kalesha, S/o.Hyderkhan, Aged about35 years, Muslim, R/o.Potluru village, Gudlur Mandal, Prakasam District … Petitioner And Revenue Divisional Officer, Kandkur, Prakasam District and others … Respondents Order: Petitioner seeks a writ of mandamus, directing the first respondent-Revenue Divisional Officer, Kandukur, Prakasam District, to conduct enquiry with regard to grant of ryotwari pass book in favour of the third respondent, without considering the D-Form Patta granted to him in an extent of Ac.2.55 cents in Survey No.309/3 of Potluru village, Gudlur Mandal, Prakasam District. It is the case of the petitioner that he was in occupation of Poramboke land admeasuring Ac.2.55 cents in Survey No.309/3 of Potluru village, Gudlur Mandal, Prakasam District. On an application filed by him, respondents have granted D-Form Patta in his favour on 14-08-1986 and since then he has been in possession of the aforesaid land by cultivating the same. As he was a night watchman on NMR basis and not having a permanent job, he is cultivating the said land and he mortgaged the same in Pinakini Gramina Bank, Tetur and obtained crop loan. It is the grievance of the petitioner that although he is the pattadar by virtue of grant of D-Form Patta; without any valid reason, respondents have issued ryotwari pass book in favour of the third respondent herein without giving him any notice and also without conducting any enquiry. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Government Pleader for Revenue appearing for respondents 1 and 2. In spite of service of notice, none appears for respondent No.3. Respondent No.2-Tahsildar, Gudluru Mandal, Prakasam District, has filed counter-affidavit. While admitting that the petitioner was granted D-Form Patta to an extent of Ac.2.55 cents in Survey No.309/3 of Potluru village, he states that third respondent has trespassed into the said land alleging that the petitioner sold away the same to him under agreement of sale dated 16-04-1999 for a consideration of Rs.7,650/- and trying to plough the land for cultivation. He further states that when there was an obstruction by the petitioner when third respondent was trying to cultivate the land, third respondent approached civil Court by filing a suit and the Principal Junior Civil Judge, Kandukur granted injunction in I.A.No.1095 of 2002 by order dated 11-09-2002. He further states that the said suit was ultimately dismissed and the matter was carried in appeal in C.M.A.No.6 of 2003, which is still pending before the Sub-Collector, Kandukur. When the matter is taken up, learned counsel for the petitioner has produced a copy of final order dated 11-03-2003 passed in I.A.No.1095 of 2002 in O.S.No.242 of 2002 by the Principal Junior Civil Judge, Kandukur dismissing the application filed by third respondent for grant of injunction. It is to be noted that in spite of the specific allegation of the petitioner that though D-Form patta granted to him is still in force, third respondent herein is given ryotwari pass book without any authority of law and jurisdiction, the same has not been answered in the counter- affidavit by the respondents. As much as it is admitted in the counter- affidavit that D-Form patta which was granted to the petitioner is still in force and as the petitioner is disputing the agreement of sale relied on by the third respondent which is alleged to be executed by the petitioner, it is not known on what basis respondents have issued ryot pass book in favour of the third respondent. Even assuming that such an agreement of sale is executed by the petitioner in favour of the third respondent, as there is no transfer of land in favour of the third respondent; third respondent is not entitled for issuance of any pass book with regard to the subject land. In view of the specific allegation of the petitioner that ryotwari pass book is issued to the third respondent with regard to the subject land and in absence of any averment in the counter-affidavit disputing the D-Form patta granted to the petitioner, I deem it appropriate to issue the following directions to the respondents: If any ryot pass book is issued to the third respondent with regard to the subject land, appropriate orders be passed, to cancel the same as expeditiously as possible, preferably within two months from today, and communicate to the petitioner. Writ petition is allowed to the extent indicated above. No order as to costs. _______________________ R. SUBHASH REDDY, J April 11, 2011 MRR