THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE V.ESWARAIAH WRIT PETITION NO : 4927 of 2006 Dated: 14.3.2006 Between: Yellakonda Laxmamma, W/o Lingareddy. ..... PETITIONER AND The Mandal Revenue Officer, Saroornagar Mandal, Rangareddy District. .....RESPONDENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE V.ESWARAIAH WRIT PETITION NO : 4927 of 2006 ORDER: The writ petition has been filed with the following prayer: “To issue an appropriate writ more particularly in the nature of Mandamus or any other appropriate writ declaring the action of the respondent in not validating the petitioner’s sale deed bearing No.10248 of 2005, dated 22.8.2005 registered by the Sub-Registrar Office, Chempapet, Rangareddy District by issuing patta pass books and title deeds to the petitioner over the agricultural land bearing Sy.No.62 admeasuring Ac.0.35 Gts. Out of Ac.8.34 gts., Sy.No.221 admeasuring Ac.0.02 Gts out of Ac.0.06 gts., Sy.No.222 admeasuring Ac.0.14 Gts. out of Ac.1.03 Gts., Sy.No.223 Admeasuring Ac.0.10 Gts., out of Ac.0.31 Gts., Sy.No.224 admeasuring Ac.0.10 Gts., out of Ac.0.31 gts., and in Sy.No.225 admeasuring Ac.0.06 gts., out of Ac.0.18 gts., total land admeasuring Ac.1.37 gts., situated at Nadargul village as arbitrary, illegal, against the principles of natural justice and violating of Article 14 of the Constitution of India and be pleased to pass such other order or orders as this Hon’ble Court deems fit and proper in the interest of justice.” In paragraph Nos.2 and 3 of the affidavit, it is stated that the petitioner has made an application, dated 8.9.2006 before the Mandal Revenue Officer, Saroornagar in prescribed form No.VI for issuing of patta pass books and title deeds. The panchayat Secretary, Nadargul has conducted the panchanama with the Panchas on 22.8.2006. But, the respondent is not issuing the patta pass books and title deeds and therefore, the petitioner has brought this issue to the notice of the Revenue Divisional Officer on 12.1.2006. In paragraph No.3 also, it is also stated that the respondent has not disposed of the application with the support of the Panchanama report submitted to him on 22.8.2006 by the Grama Secretary. As is evident from the above, the question of filing the application in prescribed form No:VI on 8.9.2006 before the respondent and conducting of panchanama on 22.8.2006 does not arise. Therefore, those dates are obviously incorrect and false. As against the prayer in the writ petition, on the docket of the main writ petition, it is typed as follows: “For the reasons disclosed in the accompanying affidavit, the petitioner herein prayed that this Hon’ble Court may be pleased to issue order, direction or a writ more particularly in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the 1st respondent proceedings No.B/139/2004, dated 10.2.2004 as illegal, arbitrary and unconstitutional and against the principal of natural justice and be pleased to pass such other order or orders as this Hon’ble Court deems fit and proper in the interest of justice.” The above prayer in the docket is nothing to do with the writ prayer. Therefore, I am of the opinion that the Officer who ever has scrutinized the papers has not taken minimum care and caution. For the above reasons, this writ petition is dismissed with a liberty to file a fresh writ petition. The Registrar (Judicial) may look into the matter and take appropriate action against the concerned scrutiny officer. _______________ V.ESWARAIAH.J Dated: 14.03.2006 Nn. THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE V.ESWARAIAH WRIT PETITION NO : 4927 of 2006 ORDER: A perusal of the record goes to show that the writ petition is filed with incorrect dates and incorrect proceeding sheet and it is not known as to how the writ petition could be numbered. Hence, this writ petition is dismissed. However, the petitioner is at liberty to file a fresh writ petition. The Registrar (Judicial) is directed to take appropriate action against the scrutiny officer, who verified the writ petition. _______________ V.ESWARAIAH.J Dated: 14.03.2006 Nn.