THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE L.NARASIMHA REDDY WRIT PETITION No.3747 of 2009 ORDER: The petitioner challenges a letter, dated 05.02.2009, addressed by the District Collector, Ranga Reddy District, the first respondent herein, to the Tahsildar, Serilingampally Mandal, Ranga Reddy District, the second respondent herein. Through the impugned letter, the first respondent directed the second respondent to take necessary steps under the provisions of the Andhra Pradesh Revenue Recovery Act, 1864 (for short ‘the Act’) against the properties of the petitioner herein, who was one of the Directors of a company, which borrowed amounts from the Andhra Pradesh State Financial Corporation, the third respondent herein. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner, the learned Government Pleader for Revenue and the learned Standing Counsel for respondents 3 and 4. The writ petition is premature and in fact without any cause of action. It is not in dispute that in addition to the various procedures available to it, the third respondent can approach the authorities of the Revenue Department for initiation of proceedings under the Act. Section 32 (g) of the Andhra Pradesh State Financial Corporation Act makes this clear. The impugned letter, by itself, did not give rise to any detriment or cause of action to the petitioner. It is only when an order of attachment is passed by the second respondent that the petitioner can feel the impact and in such an event he can pursue the remedies. Hence, the writ petition is dismissed as premature. There shall be no order as to costs. _____________________ L.NARASIMHA REDDY,J Dt:26.02.2009 kdl