Challa Kodanda Ram, J.

1. The Endorsement dated 23.9.2014 issued by the 4th respondent-Tahsildar is challenged before this Court on the ground that the Tahsildar, while considering the applications filed under Sections 4 and 5 read with Rule 9 of the A.P. Rights in Land and Pattadar Pass Books Act, 1971 (for short, 'the Act') and the Rules made thereunder, discharges the functions of a quasi-judicial authority and is required to pass an order after considering the material placed before him, the objections raised and conducting enquiry. In the present case, the impugned Endorsement refers to objections alleged to have been raised by the Manager of Sri Jagannadha Swamy Temple, claiming the lands as belonging to the Temple. A reference was also made to various writ petitions. Neither the objections raised nor the material furnished by the said objector was furnished to the petitioner and thereby the petitioner was deprived of the opportunity to make submissions or deal with the objections raised before the Tahsildar; and hence, the petitioner submits that the enquiry itself is vitiated and, therefore, prays to set aside the Endorsement dated 23.9.2014. Having considered the arguments of the learned Counsel for the parties, in the light of the statutory scheme, the contentions raised by the petitioner's Counsel are justified. The method and manner of making application and the procedure for consideration of such applications are set out in detail in the Act and the Rules, particularly Rules 6 and 9 deals with the method and manner of conducting enquiry and passing of orders. What kind of objections can be taken into consideration in the process of enquiry, are set out in detail and there is a specific methodology prescribed under the Act. The impugned Endorsement does not indicate any such aspects have been considered by the authority. The Tahsildar, being a quasi-judicial authority dealing with the rights of the parties, is required to deal with the cases before him in terms of the Act and the Rules prescribed and cannot deviate from the methodology in any manner, as such deviation is liable to be interfered with as ultra vires. Further, there is no provision in the Act or the Rules to issue proceedings terming them as Endorsement. Sections 4 and 5 of the Act and Rules 6 and 9 of the Rules contemplate as below:

"Section 4: Acquisition of rights to be intimated:--(1) Any person acquiring by succession, survivorship, inheritance, partition, Government patta, decree of a Court or otherwise any right as owner, pattadar, mortgagee, occupant or tenant of a land and any person acquiring any right as occupant of a land by any other method shall intimate in writing his acquisition of such right, to the Mandal Revenue Officer within ninety days from the date of such acquisition, and the said Mandal Revenue Officer shall give or send a written acknowledgment of the receipt of such intimation to the person making it:

Provided that where the person acquiring the right is a minor or otherwise disqualified, his guardian or other persons having charge of his property shall intimate the fact of such acquisition to the Mandal Revenue Officer.

(2) Notwithstanding anything contained in the Registration Act, 1908 (Central Act 16 of 1908) every Registering Officer appointed under the Act and registering a document relating to a transaction in land, such as sale, mortgage, gift, lease or otherwise shall intimate the Mandal Revenue Officer of the Mandal in which the property is situate of such transaction.

Explanation I:--The right mentioned above shall include a mortgage without possession and a right determined by civil Court.

Explanation II:--A person in whose favour a mortgage is discharged or extinguished, or a lease is determined, acquires a right within the meaning of this section.

Section 5: Amendment [and updating] of Record of Rights:--(1) On receipt of intimation of the fact of acquisition of any right referred to in Section 4, the Mandal Reve