( 1 ) THE petitioner herein claimed to be the absolute owner and possessor of the land bearing Survey No. 1253 to an extent of ac. 0-09 guntas situated at Metpally, karimnagar District files this writ petition seeking a Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the respondent No. 1 in initiating proceedings by issuance of notice in File no. B/1720/2001 dated 28-12-2001 as illegal and to set aside the same.

( 2 ) THE petitioner submits that the said property was purchased by his mother viz. , smt. B. Satyamma on 17-8-1957 under a simple sale deed from its original owner and since then she has been in possession and enjoyment. However, she died on 4-2-1998 and thereafter the petitioner continues to remain in possession and enjoyment. In the year 1995 itself, the respondents have issued the pattadar pass book in favour of the mother after holding a regular enquiry and later on, a sale certificate was issued on 24-3-1995. However, since the respondent no. 2 has encroached to an extent of 90 square yards into the said land, the petitioner had filed a suit in O. S. No. 12 of 2001 on the file of Junior Civil Judge, metpally for declaration of title, recovery of possession and also for mandatory injunction for removing the structures raised by the respondent No. 2 on the said land encroached by him. The case of the petitioner is that it is only after filing of the said suit, the respondent No. 2 has approached the authorities and the impugned proceedings have been initiated whereby the petitioner is asked to appear in the enquiry in pursuance of the notice.

( 3 ) THE further case of the petitioner is that the respondent No. 1, who issued the said notice, has absolutely no jurisdiction nor there is any warrant for initiating the proceedings as such. Accordingly, the very entertainment of application by the respondent No. 1 at the instance of the respondent No. 2 is illegal and liable to be set aside. Hence the writ petition.

( 4 ) IN the counter-affidavit filed by the respondent No. l, it is stated that the respondent No. 2 had in fact initially sent an application on 27-8-2001 to the Chief minister, Government of Andhra Pradesh, hyderabad seeking cancellation of the r. O. R Patta proceedings issued in favour of the petitioner s mother and also to cancel the succession granted in favour of the petitioner. The same was numbered as 026553 dated 31-9-2001 in the Chief minister s office and accordingly the District collector had issued proceedings dated 5-10-2001 asking the respondent No. 1 to conduct enquiry in the matter and take necessary action. Therefore, it is only in pursuance of the said instructions, the impugned notice dated 28-12-2001 was issued by the respondent No. l fixing the date, time and place of enquiry. The allegation that the respondent No. l had no jurisdiction was denied. It was also pointed out that on 5-9-2001 an affidavit has been filed by the second respondent herein before the respondent No. 1 seeking cancellation of the ROR patta issued in favour of the petitioner s mother and thus the enquiry is on. Subsequently, the petitioner had filed a detailed counter-affidavit on 6-9-2001 contesting the claim of the respondent No. 2. However, instead of appearing before the respondent No. l, the petitioner had approached this court.

( 5 ) IN the counter-affidavit filed by the respondent No. 2, it is stated that the proceedings before the respondent No. 1 are in the nature of an appeal under Section 5-B of the Andhra Pradesh Rights in Land and pattadar Pass Books Act, 1971 (for short "the act") as against the orders passed by the mandal Revenue Officer under Section 4 or section 5 of the said Act and, therefore, the respondent No. l has ample powers and jurisdiction to entertain and dispose of the same. The claim of the petitioner and his mother was denied and further it was stated that having regard to the fact that the land being a non-agricultural land, the question of issuance of any pattadar pass boo