( 1 ) THIS writ petition is filed by the petitioners seeking a writ, order or direction particularly one in the nature of prohibition directing the 2nd respondent i. e. , the commissioner, Survey Settlements and land Records, A. P. , Hyderabad (hereinafter referred to as commissioner ) not to proceed with the suo motu review or otherwise pursuant to the proceedings in c. S. S. and L. R. Ref. P1/1491/89, dated 21-12-1990, which is in the nature of a show-cause notice directing the petitioners herein to appear before the Commissioner on 16-1-1991 at 10. 30 a. m. to show cause why the order of the Commissioner in Case no. P1/1/86, dated 30-04-1986 should not be reviewed.

( 2 ) THE facts leading to the filing of this case are that one Dr. Mallik, the father of the 1st petitioner was the estate holder of siddeswaram village of erstwhile visakhapatnam Taluk (presently Pedda gantyada Mandal ). On the death of dr. Mallik the proprietary rights in Zamin estate were transferred to the 1st petitioner. The Collector, Visakhapatnam, registered the name of 1st petitioner, the eldest son of dr. Mallik as the landholder in his proceedings in R. Dis. No. 5814-35-A-9, dated 24-08-1936. The 1st petitioner in his capacity as a landholder gave certain lands to his mother Smt. Kameshwaramma covered by patta Nos. 46, 59, 64 and 65. The estate was abolished and taken over under Madras estates (Abolition and Conversion into ryotwari) Act, 1948 (hereinafter referred to as act ) on 12-1-1951. The 1st petitioner handed over all the records, DCB and LR registers including pattas Nos. 1 to 65 to the then Tahsildar and their receipt was acknowledged by him on 2-1-1953. While it is the case of the petitioners that smt. Kameshwaramma filed a petition under section 11 (a) of the Act seeking ryotwari patta for the lands held by her. The respondents denied the same.

( 3 ) BE that as it may, on 29-6-1953 smt. Kameshwaramma executed a registered Will bequeathing the lands held by her to her sons i. e. , petitioners 1 and 2 as well as her deceased son ch. Pattabhiram, husband of 3rd petitioner. Smt. Kameshwaramma died on 18-06-1956 and on 9-12-1956 the petitioners filed a petition seeking ryotwari patta for the lands covered by the above patta as the sons of late kameshwaramma. At this stage, village siddeswaram was surveyed and the land covered by patta No. 65 was approximately fixed as Ac. 150 and the same was correlated to S. No. 190. The said survey number was sub-divided and an extent of Ac. 50. 00 was estimated as Ryothi land under S. No. 190/1 and the remaining extent of Ac. 100. 00 was classified as sand dunes under S. No. 190/2. It is an admitted case that ryotwari pattas were granted to the petitioners for the lands covered by patta Nos. 46, 59, 64 and part of patta No. 65 correlated to S. Nos. 150, 180, 188 and 190/1 and patta was rejected for the land covered by S. No. 190/2 only. The respondents are not disputing the grant of ryotwari pattas for the above lands. Subsequently the Commissioner in Case no. P1/1/86, dated 30-4-1986 granted patta for an extent of Ac. 158. 65 cts. , to the petitioners which has been confirmed by this court. Now the dispute relates to grant of patta for S. No. 190/2 only. In the impugned notice the said order is sought to be reviewed on the ground (1) that patta 65 dated 18-3-1943 is a spurious patta (2) filed a fresh application for ryotwari patta under section 11 (a) of the Act by suppressing the documents filed during 1952-54. A learned single Judge having gone into the merits of the case quashed the show-cause notice by an order dated 28-3-1994.

( 4 ) AGGRIEVED by the said orders, the respondents carried the matter in appeal by filing W. A. No. 944 of 1994 and a Division bench of this Court opined that the main question to be considered in the writ petition is whether the Commissioner has jurisdiction to review or reopen the earlier proceedings and the learned Single Judge went into all other aspects o