IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) MONDAY, THE THIRTIETH DAY OF JUNE TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY WRIT PETITION NO : 24166 of 2004 Between: Kandikatla Mangayamma, W/o. Late. Mavullu, R/o. Tallarevu Village and Mandal, E.G.District. ..... PETITIONER AND The Mandal Revenue Officer, Tallarevu Mandal, Tallarevu, E.G.District. .....RESPONDENT Counsel for the Petitioner:Sri Y.Srinivasa Murthy Counsel for the Respondents: G.P for Revenue The Court made the following : O R D E R: At the interlocutory stage, the writ petition itself is taken up for hearing and disposal with the consent of the learned counsel for the parties. Heard Sri Y.Srinivasa Murthy, learned counsel for the petitioner, and the learned Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue for the respondent. This writ petition is filed for a Writ of Mandamus to set aside proceedings No. Ref.B.267/2004 dated 08-12-2004 issued by the respondent, whereby he declined to furnish certified copies of pattadar passbook and title deed bearing No.663497 in respect of land in Survey Nos.118/1, 164/2, 166/2, 173/3, 173/7 and 183/3 of P.Mallavaram Village, East Godavari District. The petitioner claims to be the absolute owner and possessor of Acs.4.59 cents in Survey Nos. 118/1, 164/2, 166/2, 173/3, 173/7 and 183/3 of P.Mallavaram Village, East Godavari District. He alleged that Kandikatla Engineer, the grandson of the petitioner, prevailed over the revenue authorities and obtained pattadar passbook in respect of the said lands and that on coming to know about that, he gave a complaint to the respondent. As no action was taken against the same, he got registered notice dated 25-11-2004 issued to the respondent calling upon him to furnish certified copy of ryotwari passbook and title deed to take appropriate legal action. The respondent issued the impugned proceedings, whereby he rejected the said request. A perusal of the impugned proceedings shows that the petitioner’s request for furnishing certified copy of pattadar passbook and title deed was rejected on the ground that the same were issued in favour of Kandikatla Engineer and that since the original documents were with the said person, it is not possible to issue certified copies of the said documents. Section 2 (9) of the Andhra Pradesh Record of Rights in Land and Pattadar Pass Books Act, 1971 (for short “the Act”) defines “record of rights” as records prepared and maintained under the provisions, or for the purposes of the said Act. Under Section 3 of the Act, the competent authority shall prepare a record of rights in all lands in every village by following the procedure prescribed therein. Section 6-A of the Act enables every owner, pattadar, mortgagee or tenant to apply for the issue of a passbook and title deed to the Mandal Revenue Officer on payment of the prescribed fee. Under Section 7 of the Act, subject to such Rules as may be made, the record of rights shall be open to the inspection of the public at reasonable hours of any charge and certified copies thereof or certified extracts therefrom shall be given to all persons including the credit agencies applying for the same on payment of such fees as may be prescribed. Under Rule 24 of the Andhra Pradesh Record of Rights in Land and Pattadar Pass Book Rules, 1989, the record of rights in Forms 1 and 1 B shall be prepared in triplicate and two copies have to be kept in the Revenue Mandal Office, one of which is to be kept in the personal custody of the Mandal Revenue Officer, and the third copy should be kept in the custody of the Village Assistant of the village. The above mentioned legal provisions show that pattadar passbooks and title deeds are part of record of rights and every record of rights shall be open to the inspection of the public apart from the certified copies of the same being furnished. The respondent, therefore, ought to have preserved the copies of pattadar passbook and title deed and should have kept one set of pattadar passbook and title deed at his office. In the absence of any such record being kept, he should have at least supplied certified copies of Forms 1 and 1 B to the petitioner on payment of the prescribed fee. For the above mentioned reasons, the writ petition is allowed. The respondent is directed to furnish certified copies of Forms 1 and 1 B to the petitioner, if copies of pattadar passbook and title deed are not available in his Office, on the petitioner paying the prescribed fees, within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. As a sequel to disposal of main petition, WPMP Nos.31641 of 2004 and 4760 of 2005 are disposed of as infructuous. C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY,J Dated 30th June, 2008 vrn