THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE V.V.S.RAO WRIT PETITION No.1769 of 2007 Dated: 23.02.2007 Between: Yanamandra Srinivasa Rao ..... PETITIONER AND The District Collector, Kakinada, and others. .....RESPONDENTS THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE V.V.S. RAO WRIT PETITION No.1769 of 2007 ORDER: The petitioner alleges that the land in survey No.49 admeasuring Acs.3.10 cts, survey No.86 admeasuring Ac.0.72 cts, survey No.90 admeasuring Acs.3.91 cts situated at Kommanapalli Village and survey No.22 admeasuring Acs.15.62 cts situated at Ravikapadu Village in Thondangi Mandal, East Godavari District, was originally owned by his grandfather, Yanamandra Papayya Raju. It is the case of the petitioner that his father, Y. Brahmananda Rao, was adopted by his grandfather, Y. Papayya Raju, that at the time of adoption, his grandfather registered certain lands in favour of his father and that after death of his grandfather, his father sold away certain lands but the balance land is in his (petitioner) possession. It appears that in all the revenue records, the name of his grandfather, Y. Papayya Raju, was registered as the occupier and possessor of the land. Therefore, the petitioner made a representation on 18.01.2005 to first respondent requesting for cancellation of the entries in favour of his grandfather and issuance of pattadar passbooks and title deeds (PPBs & TDs) in his (petitioner) favour and a copy of the representation was marked to second respondent, who by endorsement dated 15.02.2005 directed first respondent to take necessary action in the matter. The petitioner went on sending reminders, in vain. In the meanwhile, fifth respondent is trying to obtain PPBs and TDs in his favour by misleading the official respondents. Therefore, he filed instant writ petition seeking a direction to the official respondents to conduct enquiry and issue PPBs and TDs in his favour. When the matter was called on 01.02.2007, the learned Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue (General-A), after getting instructions, submitted that fifth respondent is no more. The matter was adjourned to enable the learned counsel for the petitioner to take steps in that regard. Today, the learned counsel for the petitioner submits that fifth respondent is very much alive. Therefore, third respondent is directed to consider the representation made by the petitioner after issuing notice to fifth respondent or his legal representatives and pass necessary orders in accordance with the Andhra Pradesh Rights in Land and Pattadar Pass Book Rules, 1989, within a period of four months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. The writ petition, with the above observations and direction, is accordingly disposed of. No costs. _____________ (V.V.S.RAO, J) 23th February, 2007 Note: Issue CC in one week. B/o ghn