IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) WEDNESDAY, THE TWENTY FIRST DAY OF DECEMBER, TWO THOUSAND AND ELEVEN PRESENT: THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY WRIT PETITION No.29676 of 2011 Between: K. Mohan Rao … Petitioner And The Chief Commissioner of Land Acquisition, A.P., Hyderabad & others. … Respondents Counsel for the petitioner: Sri M.N. Narasimha Counsel for the respondents: AGP for Revenue This Court made the following: THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY WRIT PETITION No.29676 of 2011 ORDER: This Writ Petition is filed for a Mandamus to direct the respondents to furnish the particulars of the claimants and the lands in respect of which a de novo enquiry was ordered by the Commissioner of Land Administration, A.P., vide proceedings No.V3/273/94, dated 29.03.2001, and pending in IDT No.93 of 99 (old IDT No.8/83) before the Inams Deputy Tahsildar, Chittoor. The petitioner also sought for a direction to complete the enquiry in respect of only those lands, which are subject matter of the dispute, releasing the other lands from the so called enquiry to enable the petitioner to enjoy his property in Sy.No.555/2 of Yerramreddipalem Village, Renigunta Mandal, Chittoor District, to the extent of Ac.3.39 cents. The petitioner has purchased the abovementioned land from one K.S.Ramanujam, who will be hereinafter referred to as the ‘vendor’. The vendor was granted ryotwari pattas in respect of huge extents of lands by the Inams Deputy Tahsildar, Chittoor under various orders. One such order is dated 28.05.1986 passed in IDT No.8 of 1983 CGR. A perusal of the said order shows that ryotwari pattas in respect of Ac.25.72 cents of dry land in various survey numbers including the extent of Ac.3.39 cents in Sy.No.555/2 were ordered to be granted to the vendor. Before passing the said order, the claims of 31 persons for ryotwari pattas were rejected by the Inams Deputy Tahsildar by order, dated 10.11.1985. 20 out of the said 31 persons filed Inam Appeal against order, dated 10.11.1985. The said appeal was allowed by the Revenue Divisional Officer, Tirupati, by order, dated 10.10.1992, whereby he directed a de novo enquiry to be conducted by respondent No.4. Feeling aggrieved by the said order, the vendor has filed a revision before respondent No.1. The said revision petition was dismissed by respondent No.1 vide order, dated 29.03.2001, and thus, the order of the Revenue Divisional Officer, Tirupati, was confirmed. The grievance of the petitioner in this Writ Petition is that even though the land purchased by him is not the subject matter of the appeal and the revision petition, he is being subjected to harassment and interference by the officials of the revenue department. As there is a serious dispute as to the question whether the petitioner’s land is covered by the appeal and consequently the orders passed by the appellate and revisional authorities, this Court has summoned the record. Accordingly, the record has been produced by the learned Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue. I have carefully perused the record, which contains the appeal filed by the 20 persons against order, dated 10.11.1985, in IDT No.8 of 1983 C.G.R. A perusal of the grounds of appeal would show that the appellants were aggrieved by the rejection of their claim for grant of ryotwari pattas and acceptance of the claim of the vendor. In paragraph 23 of the appeal, the appellants have made the following prayer: “It is therefore prayed that this Hon’ble Court may be pleased to send for the records in IDT.8/83 and peruse the same and hear this appeal and set aside the order of grant of pattas in favour of 5th respondent herein and allow this appeal and direct IDT to enquire into the matter and grant pattas to the appellants for the lands in dispute i.e., lands shown in ‘C’ in the plan filed herewith.” From the above-reproduced prayer, it is evident that the subject matter of the appeal was the lands shown in “C” plan. The plan contains the following survey numbers: “AREA Sy.No. AREA TOTAL WET LANDS 527 Ac.02.67 cents 532 Ac.00.64 cents 524/3 to 6 Ac.03.14 cents 516/2 Ac.23.55 cents ------------------ Ac.30.00 Ac.30.00 ------------------ DRY LANDS 517 Ac.04.27 cents 521/1,2 Ac.16.82 cents 522 Ac.20.59 cents 525/2 Ac.01.48 cents 534/1 Ac.00.82 cents 538 Ac.03.58 cents 537 Ac.08.47 cents 536 Ac.01.41 cents 516/1 Ac.31.85 cents ------------------ Ac.89.29 Ac.89.29 -------------------------------------- Grand Total Ac.119.29” It is thus clearly evident that Sy.No.555/2 is not included in the plan filed by the appellants with respect to which grant of ryotwari pattas in favour of the petitioner’s vendor is questioned. This material would clinchingly establish that the subject matter of the appeal filed by the 20 persons is confined only to the abovementioned survey numbers. Admittedly, the extent of Ac.3.39 cents in Sy.No.555/2 is not included in the appeal filed by the aggrieved persons and consequently it is declared that the petitioner’s land is free from litigation. The respondents are therefore restrained from interfering with the petitioner’s possession and enjoyment of the land admeasuring Ac.3.39 cents in Sy.No.555/2. The Writ Petition is accordingly allowed to the extent indicated above. As a sequel, WPMP.No.36745 of 2011 is disposed of as infructuous. ____________________________ C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY, J Date: 21.12.2011 ES