IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) FRIDAY, THE EIGHTH DAY OF OCTOBER TWO THOUSAND AND TEN PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY WRIT PETITION No.25388 of 2010 Between: Raja Makkuva Jagannadha Raju ..... Petitioner AND The Tahsildar, Salur Mandal, Vizianagaram District & others. .....Respondents Counsel for the petitioner : Sri M. Vidyasagar Counsel for respondent No.1: AGP for Revenue The Court made the following : THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY WRIT PETITION No.25388 of 2010 ORDER: The petitioner, which is a temple registered under the provisions of the A.P. Charitable and Hindu Religious Institutions and Endowments Act, 1987, filed this writ petition feeling aggrieved by the purported inaction of respondent No.1 in disposing of its application for rectification of the entries. At the hearing, Sri M. Vidyasagar, learned counsel for the petitioner, submitted that the land in question belongs to the petitioner temple having been donated by Sri Raja Lakshmi Narasimha Sanyasi Raju and that respondent No.1, without holding an enquiry, has amended the entries in the record of rights in favour of respondent Nos.2 and 3. He has further submitted that in view of the said illegal action, the petitioner was constrained to make an application for rectification of entries under Rule 15 of the A.P. Rights in Land and Pattadar Pass Books Rules, 1989 (for short, “the Rules”). The learned Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue opposed the above contentions and submitted that the very application itself is not maintainable. Under Section 3 of the A.P. Rights in Land and Pattadar Pass Books Act, 1971 (for short, “the Act”) the recording authority shall prepare the record of rights soon after the commencement of the Act and shall keep updating the same from time to time and if any person is affected by an entry in the record of rights, he may, within one year from the date of notification, apply for rectification of the entry. Under Section 4, if any person acquires rights over the lands, he can apply to the recording authority for amendment of entries in the record of rights. Under Section 5(1), the recording authority shall pass appropriate orders on such application, after following the procedure prescribed under Section 5(3) of the Act. In my opinion, on the facts of the present case, the petitioner has not availed a proper remedy because, as noted above, the occasion for applying of rectification of entries would arise if any notification is issued under Section 3(2) of the Act. It is not the pleaded case of the petitioner that the recording authority has rectified the entries of his own, but the entries were amended at the instance of the father of respondent Nos.2 and 3. Therefore, the action of respondent No.1 in amending the entries is traceable to Section 5(1) of the Act. If the petitioner temple feels aggrieved by such amendment of entries, it is entitled to file appeal under Section 5(5) of the Act. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that since the petitioner was not communicated with the order passed by respondent No.1, the limitation of 60 days will not apply in case of the petitioner. The petitioner is entitled to raise this plea in the appeal that may be filed by it before the appellate authority. If such an appeal is filed, the appellate authority is directed to entertain the same and pass appropriate orders, after notice to the petitioner and respondent Nos.2 and 3. Subject to the above directions, the writ petition is disposed of. As a sequel to disposal of the writ petition, WPMP.No.32431 of 2010 filed by the petitioner for interim relief is disposed of as infructuous. C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY,J Date: 08.10.2010 ES