IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) THURSDAY, THE TWENTY EIGHTH DAY OF OCTOBER TWO THOUSAND AND TEN PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY WRIT PETITION No.24972 of 2010 Between: Kasimkota Seethayamma & others. ..... Petitioners AND The State of A.P., rep., by its Principal Secretary, Revenue Dept., Hyderabad & others. .....Respondents Counsel for the petitioners : Sri P.S.P. Suresh Kumar Counsel for the respondents: AGP for Revenue The Court made the following : THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY WRIT PETITION No.24972 of 2010 ORDER: This writ petition is filed for a Mandamus to set aside order dated 24.06.2010 of respondent No.4, whereby he has declined to mutate the petitioners’ names in the record of rights in respect of the lands admeasuring Ac.145.92 cents in various survey numbers of Gudem Village, Srikakulam Mandal and District. I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue. On 05.10.2010, this Court adjourned the case to enable the learned Assistant Government Pleader to report to the Court as to whether respondent No.4 has issued notice and opportunity of being heard to the petitioners before issuing the impugned endorsement. At the hearing, the learned Assistant Government Pleader, on instructions, submitted that no prior notice was issued to the petitioners nor an enquiry was held before rejecting their request for mutation. Under Section 5(3) of the A.P. Rights in Land and Pattedar Pass Books Act, 1971 (for short, “the Act”), respondent No.4 shall hold an enquiry into the application filed for amendment of entries in the record of rights. It is only after such enquiry that a final order can be passed under Section 5(1). If such an enquiry is held that would afford an opportunity to the applicant to explain his stand point with reference to the material. The impugned endorsement is therefore in violation of Section 5(3) of the Act apart from being violative of principles of natural justice. For the abovementioned reasons, the writ petition is allowed and the impugned endorsement is set aside. Respondent No.4 is directed to hold an enquiry, after giving notices to the petitioners and other interested parties, if any and pass a reasoned order within a period of two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. As a sequel to disposal of the writ petition in the manner indicated above, WPMP.No.31918 of 2010 filed by the petitioners for interim relief is disposed of as infructuous. C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY,J Date: 28.10.2010 ES