THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE N.V. RAMANA Writ Petition No.12396 of 2002 ORDER: The petitioner claims that his father purchased the subject land in the name of the petitioner in the year 1969 from one Sarvadevabatla Narasimha Rao and ever since then, the petitioner has been in peaceful possession and enjoyment of the said land by cultivating the same. He states that in Column No.15 of Adargallu/pahani, it is shown as purchased and at S.No.13, his name was shown as the owner. While so, it is his case that he made an application under A.P. Rights in Land and Pattadar Pass Books Act, 1971 seeking mutation of the name of the petitioner in the revenue records and pursuant to the same, though the fourth respondent, namely, the Mandal Revenue Officer, Yellandu Mandal, Khammam District, issued a notice on 17.10.1989, no action has been taken thereafter. Hence, the present writ petition seeking appropriate directions in this regard. This Court while issuing Rule nisi on 19.07.2002, granted interim directions to the respondents not to disturb the crop on the subject land. Subsequently, the respondents filed W.V.M.P.No.3159 of 2002 along with counter seeking to vacate the interim order granted by this Court on 19.07.2002. This Court, taking into consideration the various facts brought on record by the respondents in their counter, vacated the interim orders. Now, the matter is coming up for final hearing. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue appearing for the respondents. From a perusal of the counter affidavit, it is clear that the petitioner himself purchased the subject land from the legal heirs of one Smt.Boda Santhamma, who was granted 38-E patta. In fact it is stated in the counter that one Sarvadevabatla Seetharamaiah surrendered the subject land as surplus land and thereafter, the same was allotted to the eligible protected tenants. That as the sale was in respect of 38-E patta land, the same is hit by the provisions of the A.P. Land Reforms (Ceiling on Agricultural Holdings) Act, 1973. It is also clear from the counter that even a suit in O.S.No.86 of 1983 was filed by the father of the petitioner against the protected tenants claiming the subject land and the learned District Munsif, Yellandu having considered the material and the evidence, dismissed the suit with costs. That the further appeal in A.S.No.58 of 1996 was also dismissed by the Senior Civil Judge, Kothagudem on 05.09.2001. That the petitioner suppressing all the above facts has filed the present writ petition. Be that as it may, it is categorically stated in the counter that the name of the petitioner was not found either in the pattadar’s column or in the cultivator’s column, as is evident from the village records pertaining to the years 1962-1963 to 1999-2000. Further, the Mandal Revenue Officer, Yellandu has never issued any issue, much less the notice in Form-XI on 17.10.1989. In view of the above, this Court is of the considered opinion that the petitioner has failed to make out any case for grant of the relief as sought for in the writ petition. Further, the petitioner has not filed any document substantiating his claim that he is the owner of the subject land. In the circumstances, the writ petition is liable to be dismissed. Accordingly, the writ petition is dismissed. No costs. ___________________ N.V. RAMANA, J. Date:04.03.2010 VGB