IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (SPECIAL ORIGINAL JURISDICTION) THURSDAY THE SEVENTEENTH DAY OF MARCH TWO THOUSAND AND FIVE : PRESENT : THE HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE: B.PRAKASH RAO W.P. No.14752 of 1994 Between: 1. Yerram Naidu 2. T.Nagamma 3. A.Narasimhulu. Petitioners AND 1. The District Collector, Chittoor Dist, Chittoor. 2. The Revenue Divisional Officer, Tirupathi, Chittoor District. 3. The Mandal Revenue Officer, Tirupathi Rural Mandal, Chittoor District. Respondents 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 issue a writ order or direction more in the nature of Mandamus declaring the action of the respondents in not furnishing a certified copy of the order stated to have been passed by the 3rd respondent canceling the Patta that was granted in favour of (late) A.Gangaiah in respect of the land to an extent of 3 acres in Sy.No. 485, of Avilala Village, Tirupathi Rural Mandal, Tirupathi, Chittoor Dist. Inspite of the directions issued by this Hon. Court in WA.No. 1186/92, dated. 19-10-1992 and the subsequent repeated requests made by the petitioners as illegal and void and consequentially to direct the respondents to refrain from in any way taking any steps to seek to evict or dispossess the petitioners in Sy.No. 485, to an extent of one acre each of Avilala Village, Tirupathi Rural Mandal, pending furnishing a certified copy and during the pendency of the appeal thereon under the Act 9/77. The petition coming on for hearing, upon perusing the petition and the affidavit filed herein and upon hearing the arguments of Mr. M.R.K.Choudary, Advocate for the Petitioners and of G.P. for Revenue on behalf of the Respondents. The Court made the following ORDER: “ Heard both sides. The only grievance which has been pending for quite a long time, inspite of orders of the Division Bench of this court in WA.No. 1186/92 dated. 19-10-1992, is that copy of order canceling patta has not been served. The learned Govt. Pleader appearing on behalf of the respondents submits that in the file which has been produced by respondents, order of cancellation was passed as long back as on 20-02-1986, however, the same has not been served. Therefore, the concerned Mandal Revenue Officer be present on 25- 03-05. In the meanwhile, the learned Govt. Pleader is directed to serve copy of the order of cancellation on the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner, which can be treated as sufficient service on the petitioners themselves. Post on 25-03-05 “for orders”.” ASSISTANT REGISTRAR // TRUE COPY // for ASSISTANT REGISTRAR To 1. The District Collector, Chittoor Dist, Chittoor. 2. The Revenue Divisional Officer, Tirupathi, Chittoor District. 3. The Mandal Revenue Officer, Tirupathi Rural Mandal, Chittoor District. (By Speed Post with a direction to be present before this court on 25- 03-2005 at 10.30 A.M.) 4. Two CCs to G.P. for Revenue, High Court of A.P., Hyderabad. (By Spl. Messenger with a direction to serve copy of the order of cancellation on the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner) 5. One spare copy. SAH