THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE NOOTY RAMAMOHANA RAO WRIT PETITIONS No. 15182 and 17765 OF 2011 COMMON ORDER: Both these Writ Petitions can be disposed of by this common order, inasmuch as the same order passed by the Joint Collector, SPSR Nellore District on 29.03.2011 is challenged. The disputes raised by both the sets of petitioners concern lands situate in Anupallipadu Village, Manubolu Mandal, SPSR Nellore District. Anupallipadu is an Inam (Shotrium) village, which was taken over by the government in terms of the Andhra Pradesh Inams (Abolition and Conversion into Ryotwari) Act, 1956, through a notification published on 14.07.1961. Re-survey operations and land settlements have also been undertaken for the said village in the year 1961 and appropriate ryotwari pattas were also issued and implemented in the village accounts, but however, allegations are traded that the petitioners in Writ Petition No. 15182 of 2011 have acquired, out of Ac.51.00, Ac.29.00 without there being any corresponding right in their vendors to convey or transfer such an extent. This statement of fact has been stoutly disputed by the learned counsel for the petitioners in Writ Petition No. 15182 of 2011, Dr. P. B. Vijay Kumar. Be that as it may, the Joint Collector, in view of serious allegations relating to the defect in title to a large extent of Ac.29.00 in the hands of the two petitioners in Writ Petition No. 15182 of 2011, considered it appropriate to keep the pattadar passbooks and title deeds issued to them for Ac.51.00 in abeyance. He has proceeded, however, to observe that only after the verdict of the civil Court, necessary further action can be taken in the matter. The two questions raised by the learned counsel for the petitioners in both the cases can be crystallized as under: 1) Whether the order of keeping the pattadar passbooks issued in favour of the petitioners in Writ Petition No. 15182 of 2011 in abeyance amounts to suspending those pattadar passbooks; 2) Having prima facie found that the two petitioners in Writ Petition No. 15182 of 2011 are in possession of land of an extent of Ac.29.00 without having corresponding right or title thereto, whether the Joint Collector is justified in denying the right of the petitioner in Writ Petition No. 17765 of 2011 for the title for the land applied for by them. These two questions, in my opinion, can be addressed only after the civil Court renders its judgment determining the rights of the respective parties. The petitioners in Writ Petition No. 15182 of 2011 and the petitioner in Writ Petition No. 17765 of 2011 are both armed with conveyance deeds (sale deeds) executed in their favour over the various extents of land mentioned there in those respective documents. It is not a case where one is trying to assert a title to a particular parcel of land without a conveyance deed being available corresponding thereto. But the dispute appears to be one as to whether the petitioners in Writ Petition No. 15182 of 2011 could have acquired valid title over all the Ac.51.00 of land said to have been purchased by them. That question can be determined only by the civil Court, upon collection of appropriate evidence. In fact, it is stated that the civil suit is pending as of now. The suits, which have been decided already by the civil Courts in the past also, will also hold a key to answer this question, but the Joint Collector cannot determine such a contentious question. Therefore, in my opinion, the Joint Collector has rightly observed that necessary follow up action will be taken after the issue is determined by the civil Court. What all he did in the interregnum was, to direct the parties to maintain the status quo existing as on that date. The entire extent said to have been purchased by the petitioners in Writ Petition No. 15182 of 2011 has already been recorded in the pattadar passbooks issued in their favour. Whether such entries should be modified or not cannot be determined by the Joint Collector at this stage. Hence, he appropriately directed them to be kept in abeyance. In my opinion, what the Joint Collector did by ordering the title deeds of the petitioners in Writ Petition No. 15182 of 2011 to be confined to abeyance is; he merely rendered them inactive for a temporary period. It does not amount to either cancellation or modification of the entries contained therein. By temporarily inactivating the pattadar passbooks held by the petitioners in Writ Petition No. 15182 of 2011, all that the Joint Collector was attempting to achieve is to ensure that the status quo existing in all respects is maintained by both the parties. Hence, I am not in a position to find any legal infirmity in the order passed by the Joint Collector. Both these Writ Petitions are therefore, disposed of clarifying that the order passed by the Joint Collector on 29.03.2011 does not in any manner amount to determination of the respective rights or obligations of the parties. No costs. It would only be appropriate that the civil Court concedes to the request for the disposal of the said suit on out of turn basis as a specially identified matter, so that the parties will be in a position to reap the benefits of the estate at the nearest possible future. ---------------------------------- (NOOTY RAMAMOHANA RAO, J) 27th June 2011 ksld