IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) WEDNESDAY, THE TWENTY FOURTH DAY OF NOVEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TEN PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY WRIT PETITION No.21576 of 2010 Between: Smt. Nanavath Bhamini & another. ..... Petitioners AND The Special Grade Deputy Collector & Revenue Divisional Officer, Ranga Reddy East Division, R.R. District & others. .....Respondents Counsel for the petitioners : Sri N. Subba Rao Counsel for the respondents : AGP for Revenue The Court made the following: THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY WRIT PETITION No.21576 of 2010 ORDER: This Writ Petition is filed for a Mandamus to declare the inaction of the respondents in implementing order dated 02.01.2010 of respondent No.1 and consequential order dated 15.07.2010 of respondent No.2, as illegal and arbitrary. I have heard Sri N. Subba Rao, learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue representing the respondents. The petitioners have filed an appeal before respondent No.1 against order dated 17.02.2008 of respondent No.2 entering certain names of third parties in the revenue record. By order dated 02.01.2010, respondent No.1 has set aside the said order of respondent No.2 by holding that the latter has passed the said order contrary to the material on record. Following the said order, respondent No.2 issued proceedings No.B/488/2010, dated 15.07.2010, wherein he has inter alia directed the Village Revenue Officer, Pendyal village to make necessary changes in the revenue records and ensure that pattedar pass books and title deeds are prepared in proper manner. The petitioners pleaded that though they have personally met the respondents on several occasions, no steps have been taken for implementing the orders of respondent Nos.1 and 2. No counter affidavit has been filed by the respondents despite the case was adjourned on two occasions. At the hearing, the learned Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue, on instructions, stated that the petitioners are not found in physical possession of the property and therefore pattedar pass books and title deeds are not issued. This submission of the learned Assistant Government Pleader cannot be accepted because, as noted above, both respondent Nos.1 and 2 in no uncertain terms have held that the petitioners are the lawful owners of the property and are entitled to pattedar pass books and title deeds. Respondent No.2, having passed the order as recently as 15.07.2010, cannot resile therefrom and take a different stand. He is bound to implement his own order passed in pursuance of the order passed by respondent No.1 allowing the petitioners’ appeal. For the abovementioned reasons, the Writ Petition is allowed. Respondent No.2 is directed to ensure that necessary entries in record of rights is made and pattedar pass books and title deeds are issued in favour of the petitioners within a period of one month 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.27429 of 2010 filed by the petitioners for interim relief is disposed of as infructuous. ____________________________ C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY, J Date: 24.11.2010 ES