THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE L.NARASIMHA REDDY Writ Petition No.6297 of 2009 ORDER: The petitioners were issued Occupancy Rights Certificates (ORCs) in respect of Ac.24.15 guntas of land in Survey Nos.653 and 666 of Patancheru Village and Mandal, Medak District under the A.P. (Telangana Area) Abolition of Inams Act (for short ‘the Act’). It is stated that they have sold Ac.5.00 of land in favour of the 3rd respondent-society. Their grievance is that though an extent of Ac.5.00 of land was sold in favour of the 3rd respondent, the 4th respondent herein had made entries in the revenue records in favour of the 3rd respondent in respect of the entire land. The petitioners made a representation, dated 25.02.2008, to the 4th respondent for correction of the entries. The 4th respondent informed the petitioners through a memo, dated 16.02.2009 expressing his inability to alter the names. The same is challenged in this writ petition. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned Government Pleader for Revenue. The rights of the petitioners under the Act were recognized and they were issued ORCs. There is no controversy about the proceedings under that Act. Further in recognition of the rights of the petitioners, the 4th respondent made entries in the revenue records from the year 1987 onwards. Those entries remained intact up to 1994-95. Thereafter, the entries are said to have been made in favour of the 3rd respondent. Even assuming that there is any illegality in making entries in favour of the 3rd respondent, the petitioners have to either approach the appellate authority under Section 5(5) of the A.P. Record of Rights in Land and Pattadar Pass Books Act, or file a suit. There is hardly any thing that the 4th respondent can do in the matter, particularly when the entries are said to have been made about one and half decades ago. Therefore, the writ petition is disposed of leaving it open to the petitioners to work out their remedies in the form of either an appeal, against the entries said to have been made in favour of the 3rd respondent or vis-à-vis the impugned memo, or a suit, in accordance with law. There shall be no order as to costs. _________ 30.03.2009 JSU THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE L.NARASIMHA REDDY Writ Petition No.6297 of 2009 Date: 30.03.2009 JSU