THE HON’BLE Ms. JUSTICE G. ROHINI WRIT PETITION No.22525 OF 2004 DATED: 14.11.2011 Between: 1. Shaik Ibrahim and another. .. Petitioners And 1. The Joint Collector, Cuddapah, Cuddapah District and 6 others. .. Respondents THE HON’BLE Ms. JUSTICE G. ROHINI WRIT PETITION No.22525 OF 2004 ORDER : The petitioners herein claim to be the absolute owners and possessors of Ac.3.76 cents of land situated in Sy.No.524/4B of Rayachoti, Kadapa District, having acquired the same under a Registered Gift Deed, dated 20.08.2002 executed by their mother Smt. Sharifun. It is alleged that on 25.11.2004 the respondents 5 to 7 herein attempted to dispossess the petitioners claiming title to the property in question by virtue of the orders dated 25.04.2003 and 9.11.2004 passed by the respondents 2 and 1 respectively under the provisions of The Andhra Pradesh Rights in Land and Pattadar Pass Books Act, 1971 (for short, ‘ROR Act’). Contending that the said orders which were passed without any notice to the petitioners and without giving them an opportunity of hearing are arbitrary and illegal apart from being contrary to the provisions of the ROR Act, the present writ petition is filed. I have heard Sri V.R. Reddy Kovvuri, the learned counsel for the writ petitioners, the learned Government Pleader for revenue for the respondents 1 to 3, Sri Bokka Satyanarayana for the respondent No.4 and Sri D.Kodanda Rami Reddy for the respondents 5 and 7. Despite notice, none appeared for the respondent No.6. A perusal of the impugned order dated 9.11.2004 passed by the respondent No.1 shows that on a representation made by the respondents 4 to 7 herein alleging that the mother of the petitioner had obtained the pattadar pass book and title deed in her favour in respect of the land in question misrepresenting the facts, the Mandal Revenue Officer, Rayachoti, cancelled the pattadar pass book and title deed issued in favour of the mother of the petitioner. Aggrieved by the same, the mother of petitioner filed an Appeal before the Revenue Divisional Officer. The said appeal was allowed by order dated 25.04.2003. The respondents 4 to 7 herein filed a Revision Petition before the respondent No.1 under Section 9 of the ROR Act challenging the order of the 2nd respondent dated 25.04.2003. The said revision petition was allowed by order dated 9.11.2004 which is under challenge in this writ petition. Though various contentions have been raised in the writ petition assailing the impugned order, the learned counsel for the petitioner at the outset has brought to my notice that though the mother of the petitioners who was the sole respondent in the revision petition before the 1st respondent died on 25.02.2004, the writ petitioners, who are her legal representatives were not brought on record and that the 1st respondent had allowed the Revision petition without hearing them. Thus it is contended by the learned counsel for the petitioners that in fact the Revision petition before the 1st respondent stood abated and therefore the impugned order was a nullity. The fact that the mother of the writ petitioners who was the sole respondent before the 1st respondent died on 25.02.2004 has not been disputed before this Court. In the light of the admitted fact that the Revision Petition was dismissed without notice to the petitioners, as rightly submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioners, the order under challenge cannot be sustained and the same is liable to be set aside on that ground alone. Accordingly, the impugned order dated 9.11.2004 passed by the 1st respondent is hereby set aside and the Writ Petition is disposed of with a direction to the respondent No.1 to add the petitioners herein as legal representatives of the sole respondent in the Revision petition – R.Dis.E2/2674/2003 and then dispose of the same following due process of law after due notice to both the parties. Such exercise shall be completed as expeditiously as possible preferably within a period of four months from the date of receipt of this order. Till such time, Status quo ordered by this Court on 7.12.2004 in WPMP.No.29569 of 2004 shall continue. No costs. ______________ G. ROHINI, J. Dt. 14.11.2011 Note:- CC in one week. (B/O) gbs