THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V.RAMULU WRIT PETITION No.28348 of 2008 ORDER: This writ petition is filed seeking a mandamus declaring the action of the respondents in not implementing the order of the Settlement Officer, Nellore, passed in S.R.No.26/11(a)/70, dated 05.06.1970 as confirmed by the Director of Settlements in R.P.No.46/76, dated 16.09.1982 and further confirmed by the Commissioner of Survey, Settlement and Land Records, Andhra Pradesh, Hyderabad, in Case No.P3/2965/82, dated 31.01.1995 in respect of the land admeasuring Acs.41.55 cents in R.S.No.56/1 of Kavetipuram Village, Nagarajukuppam Survey Group Nagari Mandal, Chittoor District, as arbitrary and illegal. According to the petitioners, A.Balasubrahmanyam and A.V.Narasimha Sastry, sons of A.Krishna Sastry, filed applications under Section 11(a) of the Andhra Pradesh (Andhra Area) Estates Abolition (Conversion into Ryotwari) Act, 1948 before the Settlement Officer, Nellore, on 21.09.1966 claiming ryotwari patta for the lands in several survey numbers situated in Kavetipuram in Nagarajukuppam survey group. The said application was taken on file in S.R.Nos.25 and 26/70-CTR and on consideration of pre-abolition document viz., 1346 Fasli Odambadika, cist receipts from 1349F to 1354F and estate patta Nos.23, 25, 44, 46 and 50 and the oral evidence of one of the claimants and two others of the village, the Settlement Officer granted ryotwari patta for all the lands except R.S.No.54 by his order, dated 05.06.1970. The Settlement Officer held that rough pattas were granted on the basis of rent reduction statement prepared under the Rent Reduction Act, 1947 and that the claimants’ ancestor was inducted into possession of ryoti land prior to 01.07.1945 and the Fair Adangal shows the correlation of old paimaish numbers to new survey numbers and that the old Odambadika Account of 1346F shows the patta numbers, paimaish numbers and the cultivation particulars. However, the District Collector, Chittoor filed a revision petition against the order, dated 05.06.1970 of the Settlement Officer, before the Director of Settlements and the same was dismissed as barred by time by order, dated 25.07.1975 and the District Collector filed a further revision petition before the erstwhile Board of Revenue and the said revision was allowed condoning the delay and remanded the matter to the Director of Settlements with a direction to decide the case on merits of the case according to law after due notice to both the parties in its B.P.Ms.No.61/76, dated 03.02.1976. After remand, the Director of Settlements, after hearing both the parties, gave his findings and confirmed the order, dated 05.06.1970 of the Settlement Officer, Nellore, holding that the land is ryothi and the claimants are in possession prior to 01.07.1945 and Section 20A of the E.A. Act is not attracted and that the Settlement Officer served the notices on the Tahsildar and in pursuance thereof, the concerned Clerk and the Village Karnam were present on 02.05.1970 and 03.06.1970 at the time of enquiry and that the Settlement enquiries under Section 15 and Section 11(a) were pending from 1953 to 1973. Therefore, the assignment of the same land in 1962 is invalid and dismissed the revision petition in his proceedings in R.P.No.46/76, dated 16.09.1982. Against the said orders, the District Collector seems to have filed further revision before the Commissioner of Survey, Settlement and Land Records, Andhra Pradesh, Hyderabad, in File No.P3/2965/82 and the said revision was dismissed on 31.01.1995. The Commissioner gave cogent reasons for upholding the order of the Director of Settlements against the order of the Commissioner passed in his Proceedings No.P3/2965/82, dated 31.01.1995. It is the case of the petitioners that the first petitioner has purchased the land admeasuring Acs.6.50 cents and Acs.5.75 cents situated in Survey No.56 part from the pattadar, A.V.Narasimha Sastry, under a registered sale deed, dated 21.05.1975 and 09.11.1978 respectively. Thus, the first petitioner got total extent of Acs.12.25 cents. Likewise, Narasimha Sastry sold away an extent of Acs.15.80 cents in Survey No.56/1 to one A.N.Kumar and others under a registered sale deed, dated 09.11.1978 and the purchasers in their turn sold half of the land admeasuring Acs.7.90 cents in favour of the second petitioner herein under a registered sale deed, dated 02.12.1982. Remaining half share was sold by A.N.Kumar and others in favour of Mrs.Leena Kumari, Wife of A.R.Kumaran, under a registered sale deed, dated 02.12.1982. The vendee Mrs.Leena Kumari gifted the said land admeasuring Acs.7.90 cents in Survey No.56/1 in favour of the second petitioner under a registered gift deed, dated 27.08.1994. Thus, the second petitioner acquired title and possession for a total extent of Acs.15.80 cents in survey No.56/1. Likewise, Sri Narasimha Sastry sold an extent of Acs.7.00 in Survey No.56/1 to one A.R.Kumar on 21.05.1975 and the purchaser in turn gifted the said extent of 7 acres to the third petitioner herein under a registered gift deed, dated 27.08.1994. Thus, the third petitioner acquired title and possession of the land admeasuring 7 acres in R.S.No.56/1. Further, Narasimha Sastry sold Acs.6.50 cents to one A.R.Prabhakar under a registered sale deed, dated 21.05.1975 and the vendee in his turn gifted the said land in favour of the first petitioner under a registered settlement deed, dated 27.08.1994. Therefore, the first petitioner became the owner and possessor of Acs.6.50 cents in Survey No.56/1. Thus, all the petitioners put together acquired the total extent of Acs.41.55 cents in R.S.No.56/1 out of the extent of Acs.45.80 cents under various registered documents as stated above. In view of the above, the petitioners approached the respondents seeking to mutate their names in the revenue records and also to issue pattadar passbooks as per law. It is the grievance of the petitioners that in spite of several representations, there is no response from the respondents. Therefore, this writ petition. A detailed counter-affidavit has been filed. There is no dispute as to the facts and stated that a review petition has been filed before the Chief Commissioner of Land Administration, Hyderabad, against the order, which was confirmed on 31.01.1995 i.e. after more than 11 years. Prima facie, I am of the opinion that no such revision is maintainable before the quasi-judicial authority under the law. Therefore, review of the order, dated 31.01.1995, does not arise. Be that as it may, the claim of the petitioners is that they have purchased Acs.41.55 cents of land in R.S.No.56/1 situated in Kavetipuram Village, Nagarajukuppam Survey Group Nagari Mandal, Chittoor District and their names be mutated in the revenue records and pattadar passbooks may be issued, since they are in possession and enjoyment of the said land since 1975 onwards. In view of the same, I am of the opinion that the request of the petitioners cannot be said to be unreasonable on the ground that the respondents have filed a review petition after more than 11 years before the Chief Commissioner of Land Administration, Andhra Pradesh, Hyderabad, since the said fact shall not come in the way of the respondents mutating the names of the petitioners in the revenue records and issuing pattadar passbooks in their favour. For all the above reasons, the respondents are directed to mutate the names of the petitioners in the revenue records and issue pattadar passbooks in their favour in accordance with law, within a period of eight (8) weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. However, it is made clear that mutation of entries in the revenue records and issuance of pattadar passbooks will be subject to the litigation, if any pending between the parties. With the above direction, the writ petition is allowed. There shall be no order as to costs. _________________ C.V.RAMULU, J 5th DECEMBER, 2009. kvni