THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE R.SUBHASH REDDY WRIT PETITION No.6428 of 2008 ORDER: This Writ Petition is filed questioning proceedings, dated 14.03.2002 issued in proceedings No.B/2778/98 by the first respondent – Tahsildar, Maheshwaram Mandal, Ranga Reddy District, and also order bearing No.A2/813/2004, dated 24.11.2007, passed by the second respondent - Special Grade Deputy Collector and Revenue Divisional Officer, Ranga Reddy (East Division). Petitioners claim that they are the owners and possessors of land admeasuring Acs.3.25 guntas covered by Survey Nos.127, 146, 258 and 95 situated at Pendyal Village, Maheshwaram Mandal, Ranga Reddy District, having purchased the same from earlier owners and possessors, K.Yellaiah and others vide registered sale deeds, dated 24.01.1994 and 02.08.1996 bearing document Nos.163/94, 795/96, 793/96 and 794/96 respectively. It is stated that after purchase of the aforesaid land, on the application submitted by the petitioners, their names were recorded as pattadars and possessors in the record of rights in respect thereof. The third respondent, who is claiming to be the holder of agreement of sale executed in 1981 by Sri K.Yellaiah and others, seems to have obtained an ex parte decree for specific performance of the said agreement of sale. Based on the ex parte decree, he got executed a registered sale deed on 15.04.1998 vide document No.1205/1998 and that he submitted an application on 03.07.1998 seeking mutation of his name in the revenue records as pattadar. Based on the ex parte decree passed by the trial Court and the registered sale deed executed by the learned District Munsif, Ibrahimpatnam, the first respondent issued proceedings, dated 14.03.2002 ordering to mutate the name of the third respondent in the revenue records for the land covered by Survey Nos.127, 146, 258 and 95 situated at Pendyal Village, Maheshwaram Mandal, by deleting the names of the petitioners. As against the said proceedings, the petitioners have carried the matter by way of appeal, as provided under Section 5(5) of the Andhra Pradesh Rights in Land and Pattadar Passbooks Act, 1971 (for short ‘the Act’) before the second respondent, who in turn, dismissed the appeal on 24.11.2007 by recording a finding that the petitioners are strangers and they have no locus standi to question proceedings, dated 14.03.2002. In this Writ Petition, it is the case of the petitioners that the proceedings issued by the first respondent on 14.03.2002 and further order passed by the second respondent on 24.11.2007 are in violation of the statutory provision under Section 5(3) of the Act. It is their case that though the primary authority has ordered to mutate the name of the third respondent in the revenue record by deleting the names of the petitioners, they were not given any notice and opportunity before issuing proceedings, dated 14.03.2002. In support of his argument, learned counsel for the petitioners has placed reliance on the orders passed by this Court in VEERAMACHANENI RAMCHANDER RAO AND ANOTHER v. TAHSILDAR, CHITYAL MANDAL, NALGONDA AND ANOTHER[1] and KOLA SATYA RAO v. JOINT COLLECTOR, VIZIANAGARAM DISTRICT AND OTHERS[2]. Though the Writ Petition is of 2008, no counter-affidavit is filed by the Government. When the matter came up on an earlier occasion, it was specifically adjourned to enable the learned Government Pleader for Revenue appearing for respondents 1 and 2 to obtain instructions whether any notice is served on the petitioners or not. When the matter was called on 17.08.2011, it was represented that there was a general notice issued and affixed in the village in Form – VIII but there was no specific notice issued to the petitioners before issuing the impugned proceedings. Though there is appearance on behalf of the third respondent, there was no representation on his behalf, when the matter was called on earlier occasions. This Writ Petition was heard on 17.08.2011 and to give one more opportunity to the third respondent, it was directed to be posted under the caption ‘for judgment’. Even today also, there is no representation on behalf of the third respondent. The provisions under Section 5 of the Act govern the amendment and updating of record of rights. Section 5(3) of the Act, which is relevant for the purpose of disposal of this Writ Petition, reads as under: “The Mandal Revenue Officer shall, before carrying out any amendment in the record of rights under sub-section (1) or sub- section (2) issue a notice in writing to all persons whose names are entered in the record of rights and who are interested in or affected by the amendment and to any other persons whom he has reason to believe to be interested therein or affected thereby to show cause within the period specified therein as to why the amendment should not be carried out. A copy of the amendment and the notice aforesaid shall also be published in such manner as may be prescribed. The recording authority shall consider every objection made in that behalf and after making such enquiry as may be prescribed pass such order in relation thereto as he deems fit.” A perusal of the said provision makes it clear that the Tahsildar shall, before carrying out any amendment in the record of rights under sub-section (1) or sub-section (2), issue notice in writing to all persons, whose names are entered in the record of rights. In this case, it is to be noticed that a perusal of the impugned proceedings does not indicate issuance of notice to the petitioners at all. No counter-affidavit is filed. On specific instructions, it is submitted by the learned Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue appearing for respondents 1 and 2 that except the notice issued in Form-VIII, which is general in nature, there was no notice to the petitioners before issuing the impugned proceedings. Very same aspect is considered by this Court in the aforesaid orders, as referred to above and relied upon by the learned counsel for the petitioners, and this Court specifically held therein that all the persons, who are affected by passing the impugned order, are to be given an opportunity and they are entitled for notice before ordering deletion of their names as pattadars, by the recording authority. In this case, though specific ground is raised before the appellate authority, it appears, he did not advert to such ground as raised by the petitioners and did not record any finding thereon. The appellate authority merely confirmed the order of the primary authority by declaring that the petitioners are strangers as much as the land in question was sold by agreement of sale in 1981. It is the case of the petitioners that they have purchased the land by registered sale deeds, dated 24.01.1994 and 02.08.1996 and when their names were recorded as pattadars and possessors in the revenue records, they cannot be termed as strangers for the purpose of ordering mutation in favour of the third respondent by deleting their names. From a reading of the proceedings issued by the first respondent, it is clear that the petitioners were not put on notice before deleting their names. On this short ground, the proceedings issued by the first respondent as confirmed by the second respondent are liable to be set aside and the matter is to be remitted back for fresh consideration. Accordingly, on the ground of non-issuance of specific notice to the petitioners, proceedings, dated 14.03.2002 issued by the first respondent in proceedings No.B/2778/98 and order bearing No.A2/813/2004, dated 24.11.2007 passed by the second respondent, are hereby set aside and the matter is remitted back to the first respondent for fresh consideration. There shall be a direction to the first respondent to conduct enquiry on the application of the third respondent by giving notice and opportunity of hearing to the petitioners as well as the third respondent and pass appropriate orders as expeditiously as possible, preferably, within a period of three (3) months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. Subject to the above directions, the Writ Petition is allowed. No order as to costs. _______________________ R.SUBHASH REDDY, J 19th AUGUST, 2011. kvni [1] 2009(2) ALD 432 [2] 2010(3) ALD 439