THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE N.V. RAMANA Writ Petition No.25920 of 2005 ORDER: Assailing the order dated 29.11.2005 of the District Panchayat Officer, Karimnagar, the 1st respondent herein, made in Appeal No. A7/3012/2005- PTS, the petitioner filed the present writ petition. The petitioner claims to be the owner of a house bearing No. 66(old), now H. No. 1-69 of Padmanagar Gram Panchayat, Karimnagar Mandal, Karimnagar having purchased the same from Handloom Weavers Cooperative Society. He further claims that his name also has been recorded in the relevant records of the Gram Panchayat. While so, the third respondent herein, made an application on 23.6.2005 to the 2nd respondent seeking to mutate his name in the revenue records in respect of the very same property. Having come to know of this, the petitioner filed his objections to the said application on 24.6.2005 before the 2nd respondent. The 2nd respondent on considering the objections filed by the petitioner, through letter No. 05/GPP/05, dated 22.7.2005, informed the petitioner that the dispute between the petitioner and the third respondent is civil in nature and therefore the same has to be sorted out before the competent Civil Court and until and unless the right and title of the parties in respect of the property in question is decided by the competent Civil Court, the name of the third respondent cannot be mutated in the revenue records. It also passed a resolution, viz; resolution No.3 to that effect on the same day. Aggrieved by the same, the third respondent filed an appeal before the District Panchayat Officer, Karimnagar, the 1st respondent herein. Through order dated 29.11.2005, the 1st respondent disposed of the said appeal basing on certain documents filed by the third respondent. He also directed the 2nd respondent to mutate the name of the third respondent in the revenue records. Feeling aggrieved by the said order, the petitioner filed the present writ petition. I have heard the learned counsel for the parties and perused the order of the 1st respondent and the order of the 2nd respondent. The 1st respondent through the impugned order dated 29.11.2005 has erroneously decided the title of the parties. Admittedly, if there is any dispute with regard to right and title of the parties, such disputes can only be resolved by a competent Civil Court and the same cannot be subject matter of an appeal. The 1st respondent has exceeded his jurisdiction in allowing the appeal by deciding such disputes in the appeal filed by the third respondent. Therefore, the order of the 1st respondent is liable to be set aside. Accordingly, the writ petition is allowed and the order dated 29.11.2005 of the 1st respondent is set aside leaving it open to the parties to settle their disputes before the competent Civil Court. No costs. ___________________ N.V. RAMANA, J. Date:15.04.2010 pnb