THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE L.NARASIMHA REDDY WRIT PETITION No.27760 of 2007 ORDER: The petitioners challenge the order, dated 17.10.2000, passed by the Land Reforms Tribunal and Revenue Divisional Officer, Manthani, the first respondent. The relevant facts, in brief, for the said order are: One Mr.Gone Venkata Mutyam Rao held large extents of land in villages of Warangal and Karimnagar Districts. He filed a declaration under the A.P. Land Reforms (Ceiling on Agricultural Holdings) Act, 1973. The Land Reforms Tribunal, Karimnagar, passed an order in the year 1991, directing that the declarant is liable to surrender an extent of 575.66 acres of land, equivalent to 11.5132 Standard Holdings. Thereafter, proceedings ensued, at various stages. Burra Bondyalu, the fifth respondent herein, and certain others, had filed appeals, stating that they have purchased lands in Survey Nos.319 to 322 of Bhupalpalli Village, Warangal District, and the same deserves to be excluded from the computation in the declaration filed by Venkata Mutyam Rao. The claim of the fifth respondent was in respect of Ac.1.20 guntas of land in Survey No.319. After verification of the record, the Land Reforms Tribunal passed the impugned order, directing that the land in Survey Nos.319 to 322 of Bhupalpalli Village, admeasuring Acs.5.37 guntas, equivalent to 0.1074 Standard Holdings, deleted from the purview of the orders dated 02.01.1995, passed in C.C.No.MN/1272/75. The petitioners state that their grandfather, by name Renukuntla Dugaiah, purchased an extent of Acs.2.25 guntas of land in Survey No.319 and their family is in possession and enjoyment of the same. They complain that taking advantage of the impugned order, the fifth respondent is trying to dispossess them. Heard Sri C.Damodar Reddy, learned counsel for the petitioners, learned Government Pleader for Revenue and Sri P.Prabhakar Reddy, learned counsel for the fifth respondent. The petitioners are challenging the impugned order, almost 9 years after it was passed. Further, they were not parties to the proceedings. They did not raise any objection, when the land in Survey No.319 was computed to the holding of declarant. It is not known as to how the petitioners had suffered, on account of the land being deleted from the holding, may be at the instance of the fifth respondent. It is not as if the Tribunal had adjudicated the rights between the petitioners, on the one hand, and the fifth respondent, on the other hand. In case, the petitioners hold any independent right, claim or title over any particular piece of land, and have any dispute vis-à-vis the fifth respondent, they have to work out their remedies by filing a suit, in a civil Court. Therefore, the Writ Petition is dismissed, leaving it open to the petitioners to work out their remedies before the civil Court by filing a suit, in accordance with law. There shall be no order as to costs. ______________________ L.NARASIMHA REDDY,J Dated:06.03.2009 GJ