IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) WEDNESDAY, THE ELEVENTH DAY OF JUNE TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY WRIT PETITION NO : 1958 of 2005 Between: Sola Narasimha Swamy, s/o Sola Chintaiah, r/o G.Konduru Village & Mandal, Krishna District. ..... PETITIONER AND 1 The District Collector, Krishna District, Machilipatnam. 2 The Revenue Divisional Officer, Vijayawada. 3 The Mandal Revenue Officer, G.Konduru Mandal, Krishna District. 4 Sola Narayana S/o. late Sola Chintaiah R/o. G. Konduru village and Mandal, Guntrur District 5 Sola Venkateswara Rao S/o. late Sola Chintaiah R/o. G. Konduru village and Mandal, Guntrur District RR 4&5 are impleaded as per court order dt. 9-2-2005 in WPMP 2834 of 2005 .....RESPONDENTS Counsel for the Petitioner:MR.P.GOVIND REDDY Counsel for Respondents 1 to 3: AGP FOR REVENUE Counsel for Respondents 4 and 5: V. RAGHU The Court made the following : ORDER: At the interlocutory stage, the writ petition itself is taken up for hearing and disposal with the consent of the learned counsel for the parties. This writ petition is filed for a writ of mandamus to set aside order, dated 17.07.2004 passed by respondent No.2 whereby he exercised the powers vested in respondent No.3 under Section 5 of the Andhra Pradesh Rights in Land and Pattadar Pass Books Act, 1971 (for short ‘the Act’). At the hearing, the learned counsel for the petitioner, the learned Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue and Sri V.Raghu, learned counsel representing respondent Nos.4 and 5 submitted that under Section 5 of the Act, respondent No.3 is competent to pass appropriate orders for correction of entries in the revenue record and that instead of his passing such an order, he abdicated his function in favour of respondent No.2, who in turn passed the impugned order. They, therefore, submitted that the impugned order may be set aside and the matter be remanded to respondent No.3 for holding enquiry and for passing appropriate orders under Section 5 of the Act after hearing the parties. Since I find this request of the learned counsel appropriate and reasonable, the writ petition is disposed of. Order, dated 17.07.2004 passed by respondent No.2 is set aside. Respondent No.3 is directed to hold enquiry and pass appropriate orders after giving an opportunity to the petitioner and respondent Nos.4 and 5, within a period of three (3) months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. As a sequel to disposal of main petition, WPMP.No.2622 of 2005 filed by the petitioner for interim relief is disposed of as infructuous. C.V.NARAGJUNA REDDY, J 11th June, 2008. kvni