THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE L.NARASIMHA REDDY WRIT PETITION No.7897 of 2009 ORDER: The father of the petitioners was the recorded owner of Acs.2.39 guntas and Acs.0.24 guntas of land in Survey Nos.1052/AA and 1055/E respectively of Maryala Village, Bommalaramaram Mandal, Nalgonda District. Alleging that the name of the first respondent was incorporated in the revenue records without any basis, the petitioners submitted a representation before the Tahsildar, Bommalaramaram Mandal, Nalgonda District, the third respondent herein. Through his Memo, dated 28.03.2008, the third respondent informed the petitioners that the relevant records are not available. Feeling aggrieved thereby, the petitioners filed an appeal before the Revenue Divisional Officer, Bhongir, Nalgonda District, the second respondent herein. The appeal was allowed on 28.07.2007. The second respondent observed that the land was not sold in favour of the first respondent and accordingly, directed that the entries in his favour be deleted and the names of the petitioners be entered. The first respondent filed a revision under Section 9 of the Andhra Pradesh Rights in Land and Pattadar Pass Books Act, 1971, (for short ‘the Act’) before Joint Collector, Nalgonda. The revision was allowed on 20.12.2008. The same is challenged in this writ petition. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned Government Pleader for Revenue. Though the application made by the petitioners was in relation to the entries for the year 1992-93, ultimately, the dispute is about the name of the first respondent being incorporated in the revenue records vis-à-vis the land. Hardly any determination has taken place before the third respondent. The petitioners preferred an appeal before the second respondent. The third respondent remained ex parte in the appeal. The second respondent recorded a finding to the effect that there was no transfer of the land in favour of the first respondent and accordingly, issued necessary directions. The determination of the rights with the participation of the parties has taken place only before the Joint Collector, Nalgonda District. It was specifically pleaded by the first respondent that the land in question was sold by the father of the petitioners in favour of Sri Sangamula Rangaiah and Narsimha, through an unregistered document and that the transaction was validated under Section 5-A of the Act vide proceedings, dated 27.12.1994, issued by the third respondent. It was further pleaded that the first respondent purchased the land from Rangaiah and Narsimha, through sale deed, dated 20.02.1995. These are the matters of record. The petitioners did not challenge the order of validation, dated 27.12.1994. The proceedings initiated by the petitioners were only as regards the entries in respect of the land for certain years. It, ultimately, emerged that the land was sold by the father of the petitioners long back and that the transaction was validated way back in the year 1994. Once, the first respondent has purchased the land from the persons, in whose favour the transaction was validated, it cannot be said that the entries in his favour are illegal or untenable. If the petitioners feel aggrieved by the order of validation, they have to initiate necessary proceedings in accordance with law. Another alternative for the petitioners is to file a suit, as contemplated under Section 8(2) of the Act. Either way, it cannot be said that the impugned proceedings suffer from any illegality or infirmity. Therefore, the writ petition is disposed of, leaving it open to the petitioners to pursue their remedies, in accordance with law. There shall be no order as to costs. _____________________ L.NARASIMHA REDDY,J Dt:18.04.2009 kdl