This writ petition is filed seeking a Certiorari to call for the records relating to the order dated 29.10.2011 passed by the 1st respondent – Joint Collector, Adilabad and to quash the same being arbitrary and illegal.

The undisputed facts, in brief, are as under:

One Aira Pothanna was the owner of different extents of land situated in Sy.Nos.722, 725 and 63 of Koutla-B Village and Sy.No.128 of Kajri Village of Sarangapur Mandal, Adilabad District. The respondent No.3 herein is his sister. She claimed that her brother Pothanna had gifted her the said land in Sy.Nos.722, 725 and 63 to an extent of Ac.3-20 guntas, Ac.3-20 guntas and Ac.4-25 guntas respectively by executing a Gift Settlement Deed dated 20.07.1979. However, her name was not mutated in the revenue records. In the meanwhile Pothanna died in the year 1982 and the name of his wife Smt. Chinnavva who claims to have acquired title to the property in question by way of succession was mutated in the revenue records. Smt. Chinnavva executed two registered sale deeds dated 4.11.1986 in favour of the writ petitioners herein and on the basis of the said sale deeds the names of the petitioners herein were entered in the revenue records. The petitioners herein were also issued pattadar pass books and title deeds in respect of the land in question.

Thereafter, the 3rd respondent herein made an application dated 1.4.1988 for mutation of her name in the revenue records on the basis of the Gift Settlement Deed, dated 20.07.1979 executed by her brother Pothanna. Alleging that the Revenue officials failed to consider her application, the respondent No.3 herein filed W.P.No.10952 of 1988. The said writ petition was allowed by this Court by order dated 20.01.1989 with a direction to the Revenue officials to enter the name of the 3rd respondent herein in the Revenue records on the basis of the Gift Settlement Deed if it was otherwise in order.

In pursuance thereof the respondent No.3 made another application dated 30.03.1989 and the Mandal Revenue Officer, Sarangapur by proceedings dated 24.04.1989 entered the name of the 3rd respondent herein in the revenue records. Challenging the said order, dated 24.04.1989, the petitioners herein filed W.P.No.7089 of 1989. By order dated 17.02.1994 this Court set aside the proceedings of the Mandal Revenue Officer, dated 24.04.1989 and directed a fresh enquiry by the Mandal Revenue Officer on the ground that before passing the said order the petitioners herein were not given an opportunity of being heard. Accordingly, the 2nd respondent had taken up a fresh enquiry and after hearing both the parties held by order dated 8.11.2010 that the matter required adjudication by the competent civil court since the title claimed by the writ petitioners under the sale deeds executed by the wife of late Pothanna as well as the title claimed by the 3rd respondent herein under the Gift Settlement Deed executed by Pothanna was in dispute. Accordingly, it was left open to both the parties to resolve the dispute by approaching the Civil Court for redressal of their grievance. The said order dated 8.11.2010 passed by the 2nd respondent – Tahsildar was challenged by the 3rd respondent herein by filing a Revision petition under Section 9 of the A.P. Rights in Land and Pattadar Pass Books Act, 1971 (for short, ROR Act). The 1st respondent – Joint Collector allowed the said Revision petition by order dated 29.10.2011 and set aside the 2nd respondent’s order dated 8.11.2010 holding that the registered gift deed executed by the original pattadar Pothanna in the year 1979 being the first transaction, the same should be implemented in the revenue records. The said order dated 29.10.2011 is assailed in this writ petition on various grounds.

I have heard Sri Avinash Desai, the learned counsel appearing for the writ petitioners and Sri V. Ravindra Rao, the learned counsel appearing for the respondent No.3 as well as the learned Government Pleader for Revenue appearin