IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) FRIDAY, THE FIFTH DAY OF JUNE TWO THOUSAND AND NINE PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE GODA RAGHURAM WRIT PETITION NO : 24592 of 2001 Between: 1 Jarugumalli Venkata Narsu S/o Jarji R/o Rutrakota Village, Kavali Mandal, Nellore District. 2 Naruboina Labanu S/o Peraiah R/o Rutrakota Village, Kavali Mandal, Nellore District. 3 Kummarakunta Mariyamma W/o Janaiah R/o Rutrakota Village, Kavali Mandal, Nellore District. 4 Jagugumalli Seenaiah S/o Deniel R/o Rutrakota Village, Kavali Mandal, Nellore District. 5 Jagugumalli Yesu S.o Yesubu R/o Rutrakota Village, Kavali Mandal, Nellore District. 6 Naruboina Lakshmi Narsu S/o Benni R/o Rutrakota Village, Kavali Mandal, Nellore District. 7 Yelluru Ramaiah S/o Venkateswarlu R/o Rutrakota Village, Kavali Mandal, Nellore District. 8 Vaka Madhava Reddy S/o Chinna Yelamanda R/o Rutrakota Village, Kavali Mandal, Nellore District. 9 Yelluru Srinivasulu S/o Venkateswarlu R/o Rutrakota Village, Kavali Mandal, Nellore District. 10 Jagugumalli Prabhu Dass S/o Thirupalau R/o Rutrakota Village, Kavali Mandal, Nellore District. ..... PETITIONER(S) AND 1 The Joint Collector, Nellore, Nellore District. 2 The Revenu Divisional Officer, Kavali, Nellore District. 3 The Mandal Revenue Officer, Kavali Mandal, Nellore District. .....RESPONDENT(S) Petition under Article 226 of the constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the Affidavit filed herein the High Court will be pleased to to issue an order or direction more particularly one in the nature of WRIT OF MANDAMUS direction the respondents to mutate the petitioners names as Pattadhars in respect of the lands in Sy. No. i.e. Sy.No. Extent Ac. Cents 573-2 Ac 0.62 cents 572-14 0.63 cents 568-6 0.62 cents 558--3 0.62 cents 550-13 0.23 cents 586-7 0.60 cents 587-2 0.65 cents 573-5 0.60 cents 587-12 0.78 cents 572-1 0.64 cents 587-3 0.63 cents of Rudrakota Village, Kavali Mandal, Nellore District, respectively belonging to the petitioners, and pass Counsel for the Petitioner:MR.P.KRISHNA REDDY Counsel for the Respondent No.: GP FOR REVENUE The Court made the following : ORAL ORDER: Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned Government Pleader for Revenue. No counter-affidavit has been filed in this writ petition filed on 28- 11-2001. The petitioners have also not impleaded the State or an Instrumentality of the State as a respondent. Instead they have impleaded the Joint Collector, Nellore, the Revenue Divisional Officers, Kavali, Nellore District and the Mandal Revenue Officer, Kavali Mandal as respondents to the writ petition. The petitioners seek a very creative relief, namely, a direction to the respondents to mutate their names as pattedars in respect of the following lands in Sy.Nos of correspondent extents in Radrakota Village, Kavali Mandal, Nellore District. Sy.No. Extent Ac. Cents 573-2 0-62 572-14 0- 63 568-6 0-62 558-3 0-62 550-13 0- 23 586-7 0- 60 587-2 0- 65 573-5 0- 60 587-12 0- 78 572-1 0- 64 587-3 0-63 The petitioners assert to be landless poor agriculturists and to belong to the Scheduled Caste except the 8th respondent. They claim to have purchased small extents of land in 1976 from the “local Scheduled Caste persons” who are claimed to be the true owners and to have been in possession of these lands. The petitioners failed to state whether the sales in their favour are by written instruments duly registered as required under the provisions of the Registration Act, 1908, after paying due stamp duty under the Indian Stamp Act, 1899. Be that as it may. The petitioners state to be in continuous enjoyment since their ‘purchase’ in 1976. In para 4 of the affidavit they assert that these lands form part of the Cooperative Joint Farming Society of Rudrakota village and their vendors were members of the said society. It is further asserted that the said society was formed in 1976 and the lands were assigned to its members (the petitioners vendors). The petitioners also assert their possession and enjoyment of the land for the last 25 years and that their names were shown as enjoyers in the revenue records. They filed a representation before the 2nd respondent for mutation of their names in the column of pattedar. No action having been taken thereon and apprehending dispossession for what is asserted to be on account of local political factions, the writ petition is filed. The writ petition is not for any relief against private individuals for effectuation of their legal rights. The writ petition is not directed against any State or an Instrumentality of the State, for any public law relief. The relief is sought against the three officials who per se do not constitute a State or an Instrumentality of the State. The affidavit filed in support of the writ petition does not disclose the title of the petitioners to the lands in question. No particulars are provided. The assertion did not also disclose any application was made for mutation to the competent authority under the provisions of the A.P. Rights in Land and Pattadar Passbooks Act, 1971 (for short ‘the 1971 Act’), for mutation of their names in the revenue records as ordained by the provisions of the said Act. Under the provisions of the 1971 Act, the 2nd respondent-Revenue Divisional Officer is not the competent authority. The primary authority is the Mandal Revenue Officer concerned who needs to be petitioned under Section 4 of the Act for exercise of jurisdiction under Section 5 of the 1971 Act. In all these circumstances, the writ petition must fail on account of non-joinder of necessary parties, vagueness in the pleadings and ambiguity in the relief sought. The writ petition is dismissed. But in the circumstances without costs. _________________________ GODA RAGHURAM, J 5th June, 2009. GRR