THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE GODA RAGHURAM WRIT PETITION No. 25278 of 2001 Dated: 9-12-2010 Between: Piddinti Venkata Ramana …Petitioner And Chelikani Venkata Rao and others …Respondents. Oral order: The writ petition is filed challenging the order of the 2nd respondent dated 22-10-2001 bearing reference No. D9/4637/2001 on the petition filed by the 1st respondent representing Sri Seetharama Swamyvari Temple, Aryavatam, Kakinada, East Godavari District, under Section 9, Rule 23 of the A.P. Rights in Land and Pattadar Pass Books Act, 1971 (for short ‘the Act’), wherein the 3rd respondent set aside the order dated 21-4-2001 of the 2nd respondent acting on behalf of the R.D.O. Kakinada whereby and whereunder the 2nd respondent declared that the land of an extent of Ac.6-10 cents in Sy.Nos.115/2, 155/1, 45/2 and 125/4 in Aryavatam village belonged to the petitioner and not the Devasthanam, as claimed by its trustee. As a consequence of the impugned order of the 3rd respondent, dated 22-10-2001 the name of the petitioner is entitled to be recorded as the pattadar in respect of the aforementioned lands and he is entitled to issue of a pattadar pass book and title deed. Sri Ravi Kumar, the learned counsel for the petitioner would strenuously urge that the 3rd respondent erred in relying on the averments in the counter-affidavit stated to have been filed by the petitioner herein in ATC No. 41 of 1999 before the Tenancy Court wherein the petitioner herein is recorded to have mentioned that the property is Archaka Inam and the income on the property is meant for Dhoopa Deepa Nivedyam of the Diety namely Sri Seetharamaswamyvaru of Aryavatam Village and also for the maintenance of the Archakas. On the basis of the above alleged statement of the petitioner herein in the counter-affidavit in ATC No. 41 of 1999 and on the basis of certain other documents such as tax receipts from 1996 onwards and the entry on the Fair Adangal, 10(1) Account and Adangals from 1396 Fasli onwards, the 3rd respondent had concluded that title to the property vests in the Devasthanam and not with the petitioner. Under Section 8(2) of the Act, if any person is aggrieved as to any rights of which he is in possession by an entry made in any record of rights he may institute a suit against any person denying or interested to deny his title to such right, for declaration of his right under Chapter VI of the Specific Relief Act, 1963 and the entry in the record of rights shall be amended in accordance with any such declaration. At any rate, any determination made by the revenue authorities under the provisions of the Act or any entry made in the record of rights or a pattadar pass book or title deed issued under the provisions of the Act is not conclusive determination of the title. In the circumstances, the petitioner is at liberty to pursue other and more effective and substantive remedies of seeking declaration of his title, if so advised, before the civil court of competent jurisdiction under Section 8 (2) of the Act instead of pursuing a challenge to a determination by the revenue authorities which has no substantive consequence as regards the title to the property. With the above observation, the writ petition is disposed of preserving the right of the petitioner to pursue the appropriate remedy under Section 8 (2) of the Act. No costs. ______________________ GODA RAGHURAM, J 9th December, 2010. GRR