THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE RAMESH RANGANATHAN WRIT PETITION NO.25380 OF 2011 ORDER: Aggrieved by the notice dated 21.02.2011, calling upon the petitioner to produce pattadar pass books and title deeds, in respect of the land in Sy. Nos.95/1 and 95/2 of Ratnalakunta Village, Pedavegi Mandal, the present Writ Petition is filed. Sri M.R.K. Chakravarthy, Learned Counsel for the petitioner, would rely on a Division bench judgment of this Court in Sannepalli Nageswar Rao v. District Collector, Khammam[1], in support of his submission that the Revenue Divisional Officer (who is the appellate authority) under the Andhra Pradesh Rights in Land and Pattadar Pass Books Act, 1971, has no jurisdiction to act as the recording authority, and correct the pattadar pass book or title deeds in question, since no person has preferred an appeal; even a person, who is aggrieved by the order of the recording authority, must first seek to have the record of rights corrected, and it is only in case the recording authority refuses to do so, is he entitled to prefer an appeal under Section 5(5) of the Act. Learned Government Pleader for Revenue (Assignments) would submits that the notices issued by the Revenue Divisional Officer dated 21.02.2011 is only to cause verification into the genuineness of the assignment granted in the petitioner’s favour as complaints have been received that the said assignments were irregularly made; the Revenue Divisional Officer has no intention of passing any orders under the Pattadar Pass Books Act as he is the appellate authority, and not the original authority; and issuing a notice, directing production of pattadar pass books and title deeds, does not necessitate an inference that the Revenue Divisional Officer was taking action to have the record of rights corrected or the pattadar pass books and title deeds cancelled. While the submission of the Learned Counsel for the petitioner that the Revenue Divisional Officer is the appellate authority under the Pattadar Pass Book Act, and he cannot exercise jurisdiction as the recording authority, is well founded, it must also be borne in mind that what is in issue in the Writ Petition is merely a notice calling upon them to produce the records i.e., the pattadar pass books and title deeds. In the absence of any prohibition under the Act, I see no reason to interdict the Revenue Divisional Officer from examining the pattadar pass books and title deeds to satisfy himself whether or not the assignment granted in the petitioner’s favour earlier is irregular. While the verification process may justify action being initiated under the A.P. Act 9 of 1977 for cancellation of the assignment, or for resumption of the assigned lands, the Revenue Divisional Officer has no jurisdiction either to carry out corrections in the record of rights or to cancel the pattadar pass books and title deeds in question, as such functions have been entrusted under the Act to the Recording authority. In such circumstances, I see no reason to interfere with the notice impugned in the Writ Petition. Subject to the observations hereinabove mentioned the Writ Petition fails and is, accordingly, dismissed. No costs. DATE: 27.09.2011 RAMESH RANGANATHAN,J MRKR [1] 2002 (4) ALT 465