HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE R.SUBASH REDDY WRIT PETITION No.8702 of 2008 ORDER: Though the matter is listed under the caption “interlocutory”, at the request of the learned counsel for both the parties, the main writ petition itself is taken up for disposal. In the writ petition, the petitioners seek direction by way of Mandamus to declare the inaction on the part of the respondents in not disposing of their application, dated 15.03.2007, in Form No.VI-A of A.P. Rights in Land and Pattadar Passbooks Act, 1971 (for short ‘the Act’) for the lands covered by Survey Nos.106 and 107 of Motighanapur Village, Balanagar Mandal, Mahaboobnagar District as illegal and arbitrary. The petitioners claim title and possession with regard to the agricultural lands covered by Sy.No.106 admeasuring Ac.12-21 guntas and Sy.No.107 admeasuring Ac.15-08 guntas situated in Motighanapur Village, Balanagar Mandal, Mahaboobnagar District. It is their case that the said lands was the self-acquired property of their late father Manaiah; that their uncle by name Vadla Narahari filed a suit for partition in O.S.No.172 of 1988 before the learned District Munsif, Shadnagar, claiming partition of the aforesaid lands and the said suit was dismissed on 04.12.1995 and the same was confirmed in A.S.No.79 of 1997 by the learned Additional District Judge, Mahaboobnagar, vide his judgment, dated 09.03.2004, and the same had become final. It is their case that in view of dismissal of the said suit, which had become final, they are entitled to succeed to the said lands and accordingly, they filed the claim in Form VI-A under Rule 18 read with Section 4(1) of the Act, to record their names as pattadars and possessors of the said land. In this writ petition, it is the grievance of the petitioners that the respondents are not considering the said claim in Form-VI A, though the suit filed by their uncle for partition of the said lands has been dismissed by the civil Court and the same was confirmed in the appeal. A counter-affidavit is filed by the second respondent- Tahsildar, Balanagar, denying the various allegations made by the petitioners, and it is stated that as per the old revenue records i.e., ROR.No.1978-89, for the lands in question covered by Sy.No.106 admeasuring Ac.12.21 guntas and Sy.No.107 admeasuring Ac.15.08 guntas, the name of the father of the petitioners by name Manaiah was recorded as pattadar. But, subsequently, in the present record of ROR, for the said lands, the names of several persons viz., M/s B.Narasimha Reddy, Smt Vadla Bhagyamma, T.Laxma Reddy, G.Narsimha Reddy, G.Pratap Reddy, Golla Kakuluri Pentaiah and Chinnaiah, Vadla Prabhakar, Vadla Sudhakar, Golla Choudani Rangamma and Javvaji Ramaiah are recorded as pattadars. Though the fact of filing of the suit by the uncle of the petitioners and its dismissal by the trial Court, which was confirmed in the appeal, was admitted, the submitting of the claim in Form No.VI-A by the petitioners on the date alleged was denied. However, it is stated that the petition filed by the petitioners on 24.01.2008 was examined and disposed of on 15.04.2008, dismissing their claim. Though it is the contention of the petitioners that the claim made by them under Form-VI A of the Act was not considered by the respondents, but it is evident that along with the counter-affidavit filed by the second respondent, the order, dated 15.04.2008 passed by the Tahsildar, Balanagar, vide proceedings No.D/762/08, on the similar application of the petitioners, dated 24.01.2008, was annexed. During the course of arguments, when the order, dated 15.04.2008, passed by the Tahsildar, Balanagar, on the petition, dated 24.01.2008, filed by the petitioners is given to the learned counsel for the petitioners, it is submitted that the said order was not served on the petitioners, as such they approached this Court. As against the orders of the Tahsildar, there is a remedy of appeal before the Revenue Divisional Officer and a further remedy of revision before the Joint Collector under Section 9 of the Act. Inasmuch as on the application filed by the petitioners, the order, dated 15.04.2008, is passed by the Tahsildar, Balanagar, in proceedings No.D/762/08, and the same is appealable under the provisions of the Act, I deem it appropriate to dispose of the writ petition permitting the petitioners to prefer an appeal before the Revenue Divisional Officer against the orders passed by the Tahsildar within a period of six weeks from today. If such an appeal is preferred, the appellate authority shall entertain the same without raising any objection with regard to limitation and pass appropriate orders on merits, after issuing notice to the petitioners and other persons who are concerned with the lands in question, and after giving them opportunity of being heard. Subject to the above directions, the writ petition is disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs. __________________________ JUSTICE R.SUBASH REDDY 30th June 2011 DR