1. This writ petition questions the impugned show cause notice dated 11.10.2011 wherein the first respondent purported to review his earlier order in File No.B2/12954/2008 dated 09.04.2009. The review proposed to be made by virtue of the show cause notice, referred to above, is by purported exercise of power under Section 166 of the Andhra Pradesh (Telangana Area) Land Revenue Act 1317 Fasli (for short the Act).

2. Petitioners state that they are owners and possessors of an extent of Ac.10.00 guntas of land in Sy.No.170 (Part) and an extent of Ac.8.00 guntas in Sy.No.157/1 (Part) of Thokatta Village, Taluk Western Circle, Hyderabad District by virtue of two separate registered deeds of assignment, being Nos.319/2004 and 320/2004, both dated 29.09.2004. Petitioners claim that the aforesaid land is a private land belonging to the Estate of Salar Jung and forms part of the suit C.S.No.13 of 1958, which was filed for partition of matruka properties. While various allegations with respect to the compromise entered into in the said suit are made, however, suffice it to notice that by virtue of the deeds of assignment, referred to above, from the legal heirs of second defendant therein, the petitioners claim that they own and possess the said properties.

3. Petitioners claim that they gave representations dated 08.06.2005 and 30.11.2005 for correction of entries in the revenue records in their favour and the Chief Commissioner of Land Administration, directed the first respondent District Collector to examine, enquire and submit a report in the matter. Basing on the report submitted by the District Collector, the Government directed the District Collector to take necessary action for correction of entries in the revenue record. It is stated that ultimately the first respondent/District Collector under his proceedings No.B2/12954/2008 dated 09.04.2009 accepted the claim of the petitioners for mutation and issued directions to the Tahsildar, Trimulgherri Mandal to take up mutation of the records of the aforesaid land in the name of the persons, as directed by this Court in Application Nos.1166, 1168, 1170 and 1172 in C.S.No.13 of 1958 dated 05.11.2004 etc.

4. It is the aforesaid order, which is sought to be reviewed by the successor of the first respondent, as per the impugned show cause notice. The said notice itself states that a news item appeared in Eenadu Daily alleging several irregularities and infirmities in the said order dated 09.04.2009 granting mutation. Thereafter, a report was sent to the CCLA requesting to revise the order dated 09.04.2009 under Section 166(b) of the Act. However, the CCLA in turn permitted the first respondent to review the order. Hence, the impugned show cause notice was issued to the parties including the petitioners.

5. Petitioners contend that the proceedings for mutation were taken up under the Andhra Pradesh Rights in Land and Pattadar Pass Books Act, 1971 and consequently, no power is conferred on the first respondent to review those orders under Section 166 of the Act. Petitioners further submit that against the said order dated 09.04.2009 already an appeal is pending before the Commissioner (Appeals) O/o the Chief Commissioner of Land Administration, at the instance of the Defence Estate Officer, A.P. Circle. Thus, the present writ petition is filed questioning the said show cause notice on the ground that the proposed review by the first respondent is not maintainable in view of the pendency of the appeal against the order under review before the appellate authority as well as on the ground that the earlier mutation under the A.P. Rights in Land and Pattadar Pass Books Act, 1971 cannot be reviewed by a different authority viz. first respondent by invoking Section 166 of the Act.

6. By order dated 28.10.2011, this Court admitted the writ petition and passed the following order in WPMP.No.35531 of 2011:

Aggrieved by the show cause notice issued by the District Collector, Hyderabad dat