IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) MONDAY, THE FIRST DAY OF SEPTEMBER, TWO THOUSAND EIGHT ONLY PRESENT: THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY WRIT PETITION No.15375 of 2002 Between: Jaldi Venkata Swamy. … Petitioner And The Commissioner of Appeals, Office of the Chief Commissioner of Land Administration, Andhra Pradesh, Hyderabad and three others. … Respondents Counsel for the petitioners: Sri I. Laxmikantha Rao Counsel for respondents: AGP for Revenue for R.1 and R.2. This Court made the following: ORDER: This Writ Petition is ﬁled for a Writ of Mandamus to set aside proceedings dated 11-6- 2001 issued by respondent No.1. The petitioner was granted Eksal patta in respect of Ac.2.50 cents of land in Survey No.553/2 for a period of one year, vide proceedings of the Tahsildar, dated 2-9-1982, and he has been cultivating the said land. When respondents 3 and 4 approached the Settlement Oﬃcer, Nellore, he granted ryotwari patta in their favour in respect of the same land. By exercising suo motu revisional power, the Director of Settlements, Andhra Pradesh, Hyderabad, by his order dated 19-9-1997 set aside the said ryotwari patta granted in favour of respondents 3 and 4 in R.P.Nos.194 and 195 of 1984-A.2. On a revision ﬁled by respondents 3 and 4, respondent No.1 by his order dated 11-6- 2001 set aside the order of Director of Settlements and restored the ryotwari patta, granted by the Settlement Oﬃcer, in favour of respondents 3 and 4. The only grievance of the petitioner is that he was not given any notice before respondent No.1 allowed the revision petition filed by respondent Nos.3 and 4. The facts narrated above clearly show that the issue relating to grant of ryotwari patta is only between hierarchal authorities and respondents 3 and 4. Even according to the petitioner, his implead and objection petition ﬁled before the Director of Settlements was rejected as not tenable by his order dated 1-12- 1997. As the petitioner was never a rival claimant for grant of a ryotwari patta, he has no locus to question the grant of ryotwari patta in favour of respondents 3 and 4. In this view of the matter, the petitioner was not entitled to any notice before the order was passed by respondent No.1. The Writ Petition is, therefore, dismissed. ----------------------- ----------------- C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY, J Date: 01-09-2008 MNR