THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE V.V.S.RAO WRIT PETITION No.3554 OF 2003 10.12.2010 Between: Padala Thammayya …Petitioner AND The Mandal Revenue Officer, Anakapalli Mandal, Visakhapatnam District And others. …Respondents THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE V.V.S.RAO WRIT PETITION No.3554 OF 2003 ORDER: The petitioner and the fourth respondent are related. The latter is the husband of fifth respondent. Aggrieved by the endorsement, dated 06.01.2003, the present writ petition is filed. The petitioner herein filed partition suit being O.S.No.139 of 1992 to which the husband of the fifth respondent was also a party as alleged. The suit was decreed. Thereafter, the petitioner approached the first respondent and obtained Pattadar Pass Book (PPB) in respect of land comprised in survey Nos.101 and 137 situated at Pisinikada village of Anakapalle Mandal in Visakhapatnam District. The fifth respondent instituted O.S.No.440 of 1988 for injunction, which was decreed. Therefore, she filed an application before first respondent for cancellation of PPB issued to the petitioner. The same was cancelled on 27.02.2001. Aggrieved by the same, the petitioner filed W.P.No.5358 of 2001. The matter was disposed of on 10.09.2001 observing that first respondent may consider the matter afresh after giving an opportunity to the petitioner and fifth respondent who were directed to appear before the authority on 26.09.2001. After the matter was remanded by this Court, the parties appeared for enquiry on 28.11.2002. Thereupon, first respondent issued impugned endorsement observing as under. Smt P.Leelavathi had filed a suit O.S.No.440 of 88 (old OS No.432/82) on the file of Additional District Court of Yelamanchali for injunction in respect of the land in survey No.99, 101 and 137 admeasuring 3 acres one cent by making the defendant Padala Satyanarayana, Padala Thammunaidu, Venkata Ramana, Padala Nookaraju and others against whom an injunction was granted in suit and since those lands were occupied by the parties, she filed EA 59 of 2001, OS 34 of 2001, EA 104/2001 and EP 92/00 and OS 440/02 which are pending. Therefore, in view of the pendency cases before Anakapalli Subordinate Judge Court filed by Smt Padala Leelavathi and till the disposal of the aforesaid petitions and basing on the said deeds, necessary action could be taken in accordance with law. In this writ petition, counsel for petitioner submits that the partition decree in O.S.No.139 of 1992 is also binding on fifth respondent and therefore, the Mandal Revenue Officer ought to have restored PPB to the petitioner. He would urge that all execution petitions in the injunction suit do not bar exercise of jurisdiction by first respondent. The issue of pattadar pass books and title deeds which carry rebuttable presumption of title to the land is regulated by Andhra Pradesh Rights in Land and Pattadar Pass Books Act, 1971 and Andhra Pradesh Rights in Land and Pattadar Pass Books Rules, 1989 (the Rules, for brevity). Rule 9(1)(c)(ii) of the Rules bars recording of rights and issue of passbooks when there is suit for declaration filed by rival parties are pending in the civil Court. The pendency of suit for injunction or execution petition arising therefrom does not bar exercise of jurisdiction vested in first respondent. Further, this Court in W.P.No.5358 of 2001, dated 10.09.2001 has directed first respondent to dispose of the matter, after giving opportunity to first respondent. In that view of the matter, the endorsement suffers from error in law. The impugned endorsement is accordingly set aside and the matter is remitted to first respondent. He shall issue notice to petitioner and fifth respondent and consider all the earlier proceedings between the parties and pass appropriate orders. This exercise shall be completed within a period of three months from the date of receipt of copy of this order. The writ petition is accordingly disposed of. No costs. __________________ (V.V.S.RAO, J) 10.12.2010 Pln