1. Heard Sri Ramalingeswara Reddy for petitioner, the Assistant Government Pleader (Revenue) for respondent Nos.1 to 4 and Sri Butta Vijaya Bhasker for respondent Nos.5 and 6.

2. The issue arises under the Andhra Pradesh Rights in Land and Pattadar Pass Books Act, 1971 (for short ‘the Act’).

3. The petitioner prays for Writ of Certiorari to call for records leading up to and inclusive of proceedings No.R.E.C.1084/2015, dated 15.02.2016 of respondent No.3-Revenue Divisional Officer, Adoni, Kurnool District and the resultant notice in R.C.B.No.221/2015, dated 17.03.2016, issued by respondent No.4-Tahsildar, Aspari Mandal, Kurnool District, and quash the same as illegal and without jurisdiction.

4. The circumstances relevant for disposing of the writ petition are stated thus:

The subject matter of the writ petition is Acs.3.61 cents in Survey No.266 of Banavanuru Village, Aspari Mandal, Kurnool District. Respondent Nos.5 and 6 on 20.07.2015 filed appeal before respondent No.3 praying for calling for the records of subject matter of writ petition, to conduct detailed enquiry and cancel the Pattadar Pass Books and Title Deeds issued in favour of the petitioner (respondent No.2 before the Revenue Divisional Officer/respondent No.3). Respondent Nos.5 and 6, admittedly, filed appeal under Section 9 of the Act. The wrong mention of provision of law, by itself, may not be a ground for interfering with the order impugned in the writ petition. The counsel for petitioner to this extent fairly states that the petitioner is not challenging the legality of the proceedings impugned on the ground that the appeal is filed by quoting a wrong provision of law. Hence, the merits of other contentions are considered and decided.

5. Respondent No.3 issued notice to petitioner in the appeal pending before him and through proceedings No.R.E.C.1084/2015, dated 15.02.2016, held that the petitioner and respondent Nos.5 and 6 are entitled to Ac.1.20 cents each and directed respondent No.4 to take consequential steps for issuing Pattadar Pass Books. As directed in the proceedings, dated 15.02.2016, respondent No.4 through proceedings R.C.B.No.221/2015, dated 17.03.2016, issued notice to the petitioner to surrender Pass Books, namely patta No.116 and Pass Book No.242416, to implement the direction issued by respondent No.3. Hence, the writ petition.

6. The petitioner relies on the decision of this Court in Ratnamma Vs. Revenue Divisional Officer, 2015 (6) ALD 609 (DB), to which this Court (SVB,J) is a party and contends that appeal filed against the mere issuance of Pattadar Pass Books/Title Deeds under Section 6-A of the Act is not maintainable. The appeal filed by respondent Nos.5 and 6, unless is brought under Section 5 (5) of the Act, i.e. question an order passed for amendment or updating of record of rights, respondent No.3 does not have jurisdiction. Therefore, in view of the principle laid down by this Court in Ratnamma case, the appeal is not maintainable. Further, no order is challenged by respondent Nos.5 and 6 before respondent No.3, the petitioner prays for setting aside the proceedings on the ground that respondent No.3 does not have jurisdiction to entertain the appeal against issuance of Pattadar Pass Books under Section 6-A of the Act.

7. Sri Butta Vijaya Bhasker contends that in the case on hand, having regard to endorsement RTI No.18 of 2016, dated 30.04.2016, by respondent No.4, respondent Nos.5 and 6 are completely rendered remediless against any decision taken or proceedings issued by respondent No.4. According to him, issuance of Pattadar Pass Book in favour of petitioner for the total extent otherwise disturbs or affects the rights claimed by respondent Nos.5 and 6, and whether the entries are as a result of preparation of record of right under Section 3 of the Act or result of amendment or updating of record permitted by respondent No.4. He concedes that the principle in Ratnamma case prohibits filing appeal under Section 5 (5) of the