IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) MONDAY, THE THIRTEENTH DAY OF JULY TWO THOUSAND AND NINE PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE GODA RAGHURAM WRIT PETITION NO : 13806 of 2009 Between: Ragam Shivkumar Yadav, S/o. late Augamaiah, R/o. H.No. 4-1-49, Kowkoor, Hakimpet, Malkajgiri Mandal, Secunderabad - 500 078. ..... PETITIONER AND 1 The District Collector, Medak District at Sangareddy. 2 The Joint Collector, Medak District at Sangareddy. 3 The Revenue Divisional Officer, Siddipet, Medak District. 4 The Tahsildar/M.R.O., Wargal Mandal, Medak District. 5 Dr. B. Vidya Sagar Rao, S/o. Ramarao, R/o. Cheriyal Village and Mandal, Warangal District. .....RESPONDENT(S) Petition under Article 226 of the constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the Affidavit filed herein the High Court will be pleased to to issue an appropriate writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Certiorari calling for the records of the 2nd respondent pertaining to file F3/7236/2008-F3/50/ROR/2008 dated 25.06.2009 along with the orders of the 4th respondent passed in B/1343/03 dt. 08.11.2007 and the order of the 3rd respondent in case No.D/4086/07 dt. 28.08.2008 and to quash the same holding that they are illegal arbitrary, unjust and against the principles of natural justice, and to pass Counsel for the Petitioner:MR.K.SARVA BHOUMA RAO Counsel for the Respondent No.: GP FOR REVENUE The Court made the following : THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE GODA RAGHURAM W.P.NO.13806 OF 2009 ORAL ORDER The 5th respondent applied to the 4th respondent under the provisions of the A.P. Rights in Land and Pattadar Passbooks Act, 1971 (for short “the Act”) for mutation of his name in the revenue records in respect of agricultural land of an extent of Ac.31.36 gunts in Sy.Nos.175,176, 176-A, 177, 178 and 179 of Narsampally village, Wargal Mandal, Medak Dstrict. Per contra, the petitioner claims to have purchased this property from the original pattedar one K.Sambasiva Rao under an agreement of sale-cum- general power of attorney dated.31-10-1996 and to have obtained vacant possession of the property under the said instrument and to continue in possession. The 4th respondent-MRO by an order dated.08-11-2007 mutated the name of the 5th respondent in the revenue records, in respect of the lands in question. Aggrieved thereby, the petitioner preferred an appeal to the 3rd respondent under Section 5 of the Act. The appeal was dismissed by the 3rd respondent’s order dated.28-08-2008. Aggrieved thereby, the petitioner preferred a revision before the 2nd respondent, which was also dismissed by the order impugned dated.25-06-2009. No procedural error in the order of the primary, appellate and revisional authorities is canvassed in this writ petition. What is canvassed is that on the basis of the oral and documentary evidence on record, the petitioner ought to have been recorded as the owner and in possession of the lands in question and not the 5th respondent. In respect of any grievance as to entries made in the record of rights, under the provisions of the Act, an aggrieved person has recourse to the civil court of competent jurisdiction by way of declaratory relief under the provisions of the Specific Relief Act,1963, qua the provisions of the Sec.8(2) of the Act. Any decree or judgment passed by the civil court of competent jurisdiction in such a proceeding would be binding on the revenue authorities and the revenue authorities are bound to correct revenue entries in accordance with the declaration or determination by the civil court. As the petitioner has a remedy by way of declaratory relief before the civil court of competent jurisdiction as to his title, this Court is not inclined in public law proceedings under Article 226 of the Constitution of India to adjudicate upon what would eventually be a dispute as to title between the petitioner and the 5th respondent. The writ petition is accordingly dismissed at the stage of admission with liberty preserved in the petitioner to pursue appropriate remedies under Section 8(2) of the Act or any other appropriate remedy in accordance with law. No costs. _________________ GODA RAGHURAM,J 13th JULY 2009 *TSNR