IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) WEDNESDAY, THE NINETEENTH DAY OF MARCH TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE N.V. RAMANA WRIT PETITION NO : 18866 of 2007 Between: 1 B.Leelavathi Reddy W/o. B. Venkateshwar Reddy R/o. Flat NO. 203, Dreams Apartments, Road No.3, Banjara Hills, Hyderabad. 2 D.Kamakshi W/o. D. Srinivasulu Reddy R/o. Flat NO. 203, Dreams Apartments, Road No.3, Banjara Hills, Hyderabad. ..... PETITIONER(S) AND 1 District Collector, Ranga Reddy District at Hyderabad. 2 Joint Collector, Ranga Reddy District at Hyderabad. 3 Special Grade Deputy Collector and Revenue Divisional Officer, Chevella Division, Ranga Reddy District, at Attapur, Rajendranagar Mandal, Ranga Reddy District. 4 Tahsildar (Deputy Collector Cadre) Serilingampally Mandal, Ranga Reddy District. 5 Government of Andhra Pradesh, Rep. by its Secretary, Revenue Department, Secretariat, Hyderabad. 6 Gurukul Ghatkesar Trust, Rep by its Fit Person R/o. Lakshminarayana Temple, General Bazar, Secunderabad. .....RESPONDENT(S) Petition under Article 226 of the constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the Affidavit filed herein the High Court will be pleased to to issue a Writ of Mandaus or any other appropriate writ declaring that the action of the respondents contained in the memo of the 4th Respondent in proceedings No. B/968/2006 dt.18-8-2007 rejecting to adjudicate the claim of the petitioners for correction of the entries in the Pattadar Column of Pahanies from the year 1996-1997 onwards is arbitrary, and illegal and consequently direct the respondents to adjudicate the claim of the petitioners on merits udner the provisions of the A.P. Record of Rights in Lands and Pattadar Pass Books Act,1971 and delete the name of the 6th Respondent from the pattadar Column of the pahanies and consequently issue Pattadar Pass Books and Title Deeds to the petitioners in respect of the land admeasuring 19 guntas in Sy.No.21 of Khanamet Vllage, Serilingampally Mandal, Ranga Reddy District and grant such other relief as it deems fit in the circumstances of the case. Counsel for the Petitioner:MR.V.VENKATARAMANA Counsel for the Respondent No.: GP FOR REVENUE The Court made the following : THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE N.V. RAMANA Writ Petition No. 18866 of 2007 Order: Assailing the impugned memo dated 18.08.2007, issued by respondent No.4, namely the Tahsildar, Serilingampally Mandal, Ranga Reddy District, wherein the request of the petitioners for rectification of entries in the revenue records from the year 1996-97 onwards was rejected on the ground that there is no provision to correct the entries and that the petitioners have an alternative remedy to approach the appropriate Court under the provisions of the Specific Relief Act, 1963 (for short ‘the Act’), and the A.P. Rights in Land and Pattadar Passbooks Act, 1971 (for short ‘the Act’), the present writ petition is filed. The respondents in the counter have taken the same stand, as has been taken by them in the impugned order. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue appearing on behalf of respondent Nos. 1 to 5 and the learned counsel for respondent No.6-Trust. According to the petitioners, they are the absolute owners and possessors of the lands in an extent of 0.10 guntas, and 0.09 guntas respectively, situated in Survey No. 21 of Khanamet village, Serilingampally Mandal, Ranga Reddy District, having purchased the same under separate registered sale deeds, dated 10.08.1994. The petitioners state that after purchase of the said lands, they made a representation dated 06.10.2006 to respondent No.4-Tahsildar, seeking rectification of entries in the Pahanies from the years 1996-97 to 2002- 2003, who in turn, by letter dated 13.12.2006, submitted a report to the District Collector indicating that on verification of the revenue records i.e., Faisal Patti for the year 1995-96, 1996-97 and Amendment Register, it was found that no amendment has taken place and no remarks are recorded for the entry “Gurukul Ghatkesar” in Pahani of Khanamet village for the year 1996-97. It is also stated in the said report that a notice was issued to the Fit Person of Gurukul Ghatkesar Trust i.e., respondent No.6 herein, requesting to file objections for correction of entries as sought for by the petitioners in the Pahanies for the years 1996-97 to 2002-03 in respect of the lands in question and no objections were received. In the circumstances, respondent No.4-Tahsildar had observed that the Village Assistant of Khanamet village has erroneously recorded the name of “Gurukul Ghatkesar” in respect of Survey No. 21 of Khanamet village, and accordingly, requested the District Collector to issue necessary instructions for correction of pahani in respect of the survey number in question from the year 1996-97 till date. Later on, the District Collector, by letter dated 09.01.2007 directed the Revenue Divisional Officer, Chevella Division, to conduct a detailed enquiry into the matter and submit his remarks. However, the District Collector, by letter dated 21.05.2007, intimated respondent No.4-Tahsildar that as per the provisions of the Acts, the petitioners are not entitled for any correction in the revenue records, and based on the said letter respondent No.4- Tahsildar has issued the present impugned memo. The learned counsel for the petitioners contends that as per Rule 13(2) of the A.P. Rights in Land and Pattadar Passbooks Rules, 1989, the Mandal Revenue Officer, the Revenue Divisional Officer, and the Deputy Collector (Record of Rights), the District Revenue Officer, the Collector of the District, and any officer designated by the Collector for this purpose in exercise of their general powers of supervision, shall be competent, suo motu, to test and revise the entries in the confirmed Record of Rights provided that no revision shall be made without giving any notice to any person whose name is entered in the Record of Rights, as having any interest in the land in respect of the entry relating to which the alteration is proposed of making a representation in that behalf. Though the learned Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue did not deny the said fact, he, however, submits that now the petitioners have to file an application under Section 6-A of the Act, for issuance of pattadar passbooks and to make correction of the entries in the revenue records, to which course, the learned counsel for the petitioners as well as the learned counsel appearing on behalf of respondent No.6-Trust, also agreed. In the circumstances, all the counsel agreed for disposal of the writ petition with the following directions: The impugned memo dated 18.08.2007, issued by respondent No.4-Tahsildar is set aside. The petitioners are at liberty to file an application under Section 6-A of the Act before respondent No.4- Tahsildar, for issuance of pattadar pass books and correction of entries in the revenue records, and on filing such application, respondent No.4- Tahsildar shall consider the same and after issuing notices to the necessary parties and hearing them, pass appropriate speaking orders, in accordance with law. Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of. No costs. ___________________ N.V. RAMANA, J. Date: 19.03.2008 Ksr/Nsr ..... REGISTRAR // TRUE COPY // SECTION OFFICER To 1.2CCs to 2.2CD copies Form-NIC-OGS/WP{VSMI}