THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V. RAMULU W.P. Nos. 945 of 2006 and 14079 of 2009 and C.C. No. 1764 of 2009 COMMON ORDER: W.P. No. 14079 of 2009 is filed seeking Mandamus declaring inaction on the part of respondent No.2 in implementing the order of 1st respondent dated 27.3.2004 as arbitrary, illegal and contrary to the provisions of A.P. Assigned Lands (Prohibition of Transfers) Act, 1977. According to the petitioners, they belong to S.C. Community. The Government of A.P. has assigned dry land measuring an extent of Ac.5-00 in S.Nos. 127, 128, 131, 132, 140 to 146 and 271, situated at Vattinagula village, Rajendranagar Mandal, Rangareddy District, in favour of their father Begari Gandaiah. After the death of their father, the petitioners approached 2nd respondent for mutation of their names in the revenue records. The 2nd respondent, instead of incorporating their names in the revenue records with regard to the above said lands, for the reasons best known to him, has mutated the name of 3rd respondent. 3rd respondent, in collusion with revenue officials, has got incorporated her name in the column ‘pattadar’. A revision petition was preferred under Section 9 of the A.P. Rights in Land and Pattadar Passbooks Act, before 1st respondent, for correction of entries, and the same is pending. Whereas, according to 3rd respondent, they have purchased the land from the father of the petitioners and they are in possession and enjoyment of the same. However, it appears, the respondents-authorities have initiated proceedings under the A.P. Assigned Lands (Prohibition of Transfers) Act, 1977 and the Rules made thereunder, and final proceedings were issued. Aggrieved by the same, 3rd respondent has already filed appeal before the Joint Collector, Rangareddy District and the same is pending as of today. When the stay petition filed along with the appeal was not disposed of, 3rd respondent approached this Court by way of filing writ petition and the same was disposed of granting stay during pendency of the appeal. The appeal is still pending as of today. While that being so, in view of the order dated 27.3.2004 passed by 1st respondent, petitioners, claiming to be the descendants of original assignee, filed present writ petition seeking to implement the order dated 27.3.2004, which reads as under: “Perused the report of the Mandal Revenue Officer, Rajendranagar Mandal in Lr.No.D 2354 2003 dated 24.12.2003 and also having verified the material papers submitted by the respondents. It is seen that the land being Agricultural Ceiling Surplus and Government Land were assigned to the respondent No.1 and they have sold away the same in violation of the conditions of assignment. Therefore, the orders passed by the Mandal Revenue Officer, Rajendranagar mutating the names of respondent No.2 is in contravention of provisions….of the Andhra Pradesh Rights in Land and Pattadar Passbooks Rules, 1989. Therefore I am not satisfied with the report prepared and maintained by the Mandal Revenue Officer, Rajendranagar Mandal in respect of the lands in question as to the regularity, correctness, legality and property as such the orders passed by the Mandal Revenue Officer, Rajendranagar for making such entries in Revenue Records are hereby set aside and the Pattadar Pass Books and title deeds issued to the respondents are also hereby cancelled. Accordingly the revision is disposed of”. While admitting the writ petition, interim order was passed in this writ petition on 24.8.2009 whereunder the respondents were directed to issue pattadar passbooks to the petitioners after incorporating their names in the revenue records in respect of he subject lands. Now, the respondents-authorities have filed vacate patition in WVMP No. 165 of 2010 seeking to vacate the said order. On the other hand, W.P. No. 945 of 2006 is filed challenging the order 27.3.2004 of the Joint Collector, Rangareddy District, which is extracted above. While admitting the writ petition, status quo as on that date was granted. While that being so, the contempt case is filed complaining willful disobedience on the part of respondents in implementing the interim order passed inWPMP No. 18430 of 2009 in W.P. No. 14069 of 2009 dated 24.8.2009. At that stage, when it was brought to the notice of the Court that the W.P. No. 945 of 2006 is filed challenging the very same proceedings dated 27.3.2004, which is sought to be implemented in the W.P. No. 14079 of 2009, it was directed to post all these matters together. That is how, all these matters have come up today for hearing. Heard all the learned counsel for the parties including the learned Government Pleader. The fact that substantial appeal, filed against resumption order passed by the Revenue Divisional Officer, is pending before the Joint Collector and stay of operation of the said order is subsisting during pendency of the appeal, is not disputed. Once the substantial appeal is pending, it may not be appropriate on the part of this Court to go into the merits of these two writ petitions and take a decision either for the purpose of implementation of the order dated 27.3.2004 in Case No.D5/9676/2003 on the file of Joint Collector, Rangareddy District or to examine the said order passed by the Joint Collector. Therefore, the two writ petitions are dismissed and the parties are directed to pursue the appeal pending before the Joint Collector, Rangareddy District. Till disposal of the said appeal, the order dated 27.3.2004 shall not be given effect to. The petitioners in W.P. 14079 of 2009 may seek to be impleaded in the appeal pending before the Joint Collector by filing implead petition and on such filing of implead petition, the Joint Collector shall entertain the same and dispose of the appeal within a period of three months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order, only after hearing all the concerned parties. In view of the dismissal of the very writ petition, nothing survives for adjudication in the Contempt Case No. 1764 of 2009. It is accordingly closed. JUSTICE C.V. RAMULU. Date: 15-4-2010. MVB.