THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE N.V. RAMANA Writ Petition No. 26234 of 2007 Date: 10.12.2007 Between: Guddati Srinivasa Subramanya Ravi Kumar and another. ..... PETITIONERS AND The Government of A.P., rep. by its Secretary, Department of Revenue, Secretariat, Hyderabad and others. .....RESPONDENTS THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE N.V. RAMANA Writ Petition No. 26234 of 2007 Order: The petitioners state that they are the absolute owners and possessors of agricultural lands totally admeasuring Ac.24.30 Cents in Survey Nos. 312/1, 312/2, 312/3, 332 and 333, situated at Cheepurupalli (East), Parvada Mandal, Visakhapatnam District. The case of the petitioners is that when respondent No.8 in collusion with respondent Nos.6 and 7 created some false Adangals/Pahanies, as if they are the owners and pattadars of agricultural lands to an extent of Ac.54.55 cents covered in the above said survey numbers, they filed a protest petition before respondent No.4 not to register the said lands. Now, the grievance of the petitioners is that under the guise of the orders passed by this Court in W.P. Nos. 5784 and 19287 of 2007, filed by the un-official respondent Nos.6 to 8, respondent No.4 is going to receive and register the documents to be submitted by them. Hence, they filed the present writ petition seeking to direct respondent No.4 not to register the documents submitted by the un-official respondent Nos.6 to 8 in respect of the lands covered in Survey Nos. 331, 332 and 333 of Cheepurupalli (East), Parvada Mandal, Visakhapatnam District. Admittedly, this Court in W.P. Nos. 5784 and 19287 of 2007, filed by the un-official respondent Nos.6 to 8, directed respondent No.4 herein to consider the documents submitted for registration by the un- official respondent Nos.6 to 8. If the petitioners are aggrieved by the said orders, it is open for them to avail the remedies available under law, such as to file a review application or an appeal against the said orders as the case may be. But, certainly a fresh writ petition seeking a direction to respondent No.4 not to register the documents produced by the un-official respondent Nos.6 to 8 is not maintainable, more particularly when such documents are being accepted by respondent No.4 in compliance of the orders passed by this Court in W.P. Nos. 5784 and 19287 of 2007. Accordingly, the writ petition is dismissed. However, the petitioners are at liberty to avail the remedies available to them under law as against the orders passed by this Court in W.P. Nos. 5784 and 19287 of 2007. No costs. ___________________ N.V. RAMANA, J. Date: 10.12.2007 Nsr