THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE V.V.S.RAO WRIT PETITION No.12749 of 2010 June 08, 2010 Between: G.Prabhakar, S/o.Venkaiah And another … Petitioners And The Joint Collector-I, Ranga Reddy District And others ... Respondents THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE V.V.S.RAO WRIT PETITION No.12749 of 2010 ORDER: The petitioners are allegedly owners of agricultural land admeasuring Acs.2.00 comprised in survey Nos.23 and 25 of Yadgarpalli Village of Keesara Mandal in Ranga Reddy District. They purchased the property from G.Mohan Reddy, who acquired the title under a gift/ settlement deed executed by his mother, Butchamma. Be that as it is, after purchasing the property, petitioners approached the Tahsildar for necessary changes in the record of rights and for obtaining pattadar pass books and title deeds. Petitioners were issued the same. Subsequently alleging that respondents 4 and 5 are trying to grab their land, petitioners filed O.S.No.635 of 2006 on the file of the Additional Junior Civil Judge, Medchal. They also obtained ad interim injunction in I.A.No.2149 of 2006 dated 19.10.2006, which is subsisting. The suit is now transferred and renumbered as O.S.No.120 of 2008 on the file of the Additional Junior Civil Judge, Malkajgiri. Petitioners alleged that at the instance of respondents 4 and 5, second respondent passed orders vide proceedings No.A2/5981/07, dated 07.6.2008. Pursuant thereof, third respondent altered the pahanis in favour of respondents 4 and 5. Aggrieved by the same, petitioners filed revision under Section 9 of the Andhra Pradesh Rights in Land and Pattadar Pass Books Act, 1971 (RoR Act) before the first respondent. By the impugned order dated 10.11.2009, the same was dismissed inter alia on the ground that when the suit is pending before the Civil Court, the initiation of proceedings under RoR Act amounts to parallel proceedings. The petitioners were directed to await outcome of civil suit and thereafter approach the revenue authorities. This Court heard the counsel for petitioners and the Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue (Telangana Area). Petitioners contend that change of RoR in favour of respondents 4 and 5 without notice to petitioner is illegal and arbitrary and mere pendency of the suit filed by the petitioners is not a bar to entertain the revision by the Joint Collector. The submission cannot be accepted. In view of the decision of this Court in V.Satyanarayana v District Collector, Nalgonda[1] wherein it was held that during the pendency of civil suit authorities under RoR Act cannot entertain applications/petitions for redressal. This Court therefore does not find any infirmity in the impugned order. Be it, however, made clear that civil court has to independently decide the issues that fall for consideration in the suit notwithstanding the fact that the Joint Collector dismissed the revision petition filed by petitioners. The writ petition, with the above observations, is accordingly dismissed. ______________ (V.V.S. RAO, J) June 08, 2010. YS [1] 2000(6) ALT 292