THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY W.P.No.29210 of 2010 Date : 24-11-2010 Between : Perike Mount Batten .. Petitioner And The Revenue Divisional Officer, Nagarkurnool, Mahaboobnagar District and another .. Respondents Counsel for petitioner : Sri A.Vishnu Vardhan Reddy Counsel for respondents : Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue The Court made the following : ORDER: This Writ Petition is filed for a mandamus to declare the action of respondent No.2 in seeking to hold an enquiry into the claims made by third parties for alteration of record of rights as illegal and arbitrary. A perusal of the record shows that certain third parties approached respondent No.2 who has issued notices to the petitioner and others to place documents of title before him for passing appropriate orders on the entries of record of rights under the provisions of A.P. Rights in Land and Pattadar Passbooks Act, 1971 (for short, “the Act”). The petitioner has pleaded that in the year 2003 itself, his claim for entering his name in record of rights was accepted and accordingly record of rights was amended and that therefore there is no question of further consideration of the claims of third parties. The petitioner also pleaded that a civil suit for partition in respect of the same land is pending. In my opinion, as the proceedings challenged in this Writ Petition are only in the nature of notice issued by respondent No.2 purporting to act under the provisions of the Act, there is no reason for this Court to interfere with the impugned notices at this stage. The learned counsel for the petitioner stated that his client has already submitted objections to the notice issued by respondent No.2. The learned Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue on instructions submitted that the petitioner has requested respondent No.2 to grant time for filing further documents. In the light of these facts, respondent No.2 is directed to consider the objections of the petitioner in accordance with the provisions of the Act and take appropriate decision. If the petitioner feels aggrieved by any decision taken by respondent No.2, it is needless to note that he is entitled to avail appropriate remedies under the provisions of the Act. Subject to the above observations, the Writ Petition is disposed of. As a sequel to disposal of the Writ Petition, WPMP No.37203/2010 is disposed of as infructuous. __________________________ C.V. NAGARJUNA REDDY.,J Date: 24-11-2010 AM