HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE L. NARASIMHA REDDY WRIT PETITION No.16261 of 2008 ORDER: The petitioners claim to have purchased an extent of Ac.1.75 cents and Ac.1.25 cents in Survey Nos.399 and 790 respectively of Yazili Village, Karlapalem Mandal through registered sale deed dated 08.10.2004. They were issued pattadar pass books in respect of the said land. Feeling aggrieved by the issuance of pattadar pass books in favour of the petitioners, the 4th respondent preferred an appeal before the Revenue Divisional Officer, Tenali, 2nd respondent. She has also filed suits in respect of these very lands. Taking note of the filing of the suits by the 4th respondent, the 2nd respondent passed an order dated 08.04.2005 directing cancellation of the pattadar pass books in favour of the petitioners as well as the 4th respondent. The 4th respondent filed a revision before the Joint Collector, Guntur District, 1st respondent herein under Section 9 of the A.P. Record of Rights in Land and Pattadar Pass Books Act (for short ‘the Act’). The revision was disposed of through an order dated 17.06.2008, directing that the pattadar pass book issued in favour of the 4th respondent shall be continued, but necessary action shall taken after the disposal of the suits. It was further directed that the proceedings be initiated under Section 145 of Cr.P.C. The petitioners feel aggrieved by the same. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners, learned Government Pleader for Revenue and the learned counsel for respondent No.4. The 4th respondent was issued pattadar pass books in respect of the lands referred to above. However, on a purchase said to have been made by the petitioners from a different person, they too were issued pattadar pass books. Obviously, the 4th respondent felt aggrieved and filed an appeal under Section 5(5) of the Act. She has also filed suits simultaneously in respect of these lands. Remedies under the Act in relation to pattadar pass books on the one hand and filing of suits on the other are almost mutually exclusive. Both cannot be pursued simultaneously. Obviously for this reason, the 2nd respondent refused to decide the matter on merits. However, he has chosen to direct cancellation of the pattadar pass books in favour of the petitioners as well as the 4th respondent. In the revision, the 1st respondent has traveled beyond the scope of the subject matter and directed initiation of proceedings under Section 145 of Cr.P.C. Therefore, the orders passed by respondents 1 and 2 cannot be sustained in law. This Court would have considered the feasibility of remanding the matter to the 2nd respondent for fresh consideration and disposal, but for the fact that the 4th respondent intends to pursue the remedy of suit. Section 8(2) of the Act mandates that any adjudication in a suit in respect of the rights over the lands would prevail over the entries or other steps taken under that Act. Therefore, the writ petition is allowed and the orders passed by respondents 1 and 2 are set aside. It shall be open to the 4th respondent to pursue her remedies in the suits either pending or that may be filed later. The pattadar pass books issued in favour of the petitioners shall be subject to the outcome of the suits. There shall be no order as to costs. _________ 06.03.2009 JSU HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE L. NARASIMHA REDDY WRIT PETITION No.16261 of 2008 Date: 06.03.2009 JSU