This writ petition, under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, is filed, seeking the following relief:

"To issue a writ or order or direction more particularly one in the nature of certiorari, calling for the records pertaining to the Case No.D4/ROR/1/2003, dated 20.9.2003 from the office of respondent No.1 and quash the said order dated 20.9.2003 declaring it as illegal, arbitrary and violative of Article 14 of the Constitution of India and against the mandatory provisions of A.P. Rights in Land and Pattedar Pass Book Act 1971 and its Rules 1989 and direct the respondent Nos. 1 to 4 not to pay any compensation to respondent No.5 herein for acquired land of the petitioner to the extent of 16 acres 25 guntas situated in Sy.No.28-B of Gimma (b) Village, Mandal Jainath, Adilabad District, and direct the respondent No.1 to 4 herein not to assign the said land to the third parties and direct the respondent Nos. 1 to 4 herein to pay compensation to the petitioner herein for acquisition of the said land following mandatory provisions of L.A. Act, if respondent Nos. 1 to 4 requires its acquisition"

2. Heard Sri Chandra Sekhar, learned Counsel for the writ petitioners, learned Government Pleader for Revenue for the respondents 1 to 3 and Sri M. Sudhir, learned Counsel for the fourth respondent and Sri Potti Venkata Ramana Rao, learned Counsel for the sixth respondent and perused the material available on record.

3. The facts pertinent and essential for disposal of the present writ petition are as follows:

According to the petitioner, her paternal grandfather late Sri Ramakrishna Pappaya owned agricultural land admeasuring Acs.16-25 gts in Sy.No.28-B of Gimma P. Village, Mandal Jainath, District Adilabad and after his death, his sole legal heir i.e., the father of the petitioner viz., late Sri Narla Ramakistu became the owner and pattedar of the land by survivorship and the said Ramakistu used to give his land on lease and the said Ramakistu died on 20.9.1985, leaving the petitioner as the sole legal heir and the petitioner became the owner of the said land. As per the petitioner herein, she is residing in Maharashtra State and taking advantage of her absence, fifth respondent herein, in whose favour the father of the petitioner leased out a part of the subject land, obtained pattedar passbook from the third respondent/Mandal Revenue Officer by fabricating the sale deed on a plain paper saying that the petitioner's father sold the entire land to the father of the fifth respondent on 23.2.1968 and on coming to know of the same, petitioner made a representation dated 16.8.2002 to the official respondents, requesting for cancellation of their pattedar passbooks. Thereafter, pursuant to the orders of this Court in WA No.617/2003 filed by the petitioner, the first respondent passed an order vide Case No.D4/ROR/1/2003, dated 20.9.2003, rejecting the claim of the petitioner. Challenging the said order passed by the Joint Collector, first respondent herein, confirming the proceedings of the Mandal Revenue Officer, the present writ petition has been filed.

4. In the counter-affidavit filed by the first respondent herein, it is stated that the official respondents herein acted strictly in accordance with the provisions of the Andhra Pradesh Rights in Land and Pattedar Pass Book Act, 1971 (for short 'the Act') and the Andhra Pradesh Rights in Land and Pattedar Passbooks Rules, 1989 (for short 'the Rules'). It is further stated that the fifth respondent herein purchased the subject land by duly paying the land compensation to the fifth respondent and allotted the same to the landless poor SC beneficiaries. It is further stated in the counter that the compensation was paid to the fifth respondent herein on 9.12.2003 and the physical possession of the subject property was also handed over to the concerned beneficiaries on 18.12.2003 by holding the panchanama by the Mandal Revenue Officer, Jainad.

5. A counter-affidavit is also filed by the fo