1. These two Writ Petitions are being disposed of by this common order as the parties are common and the cause of action is also common.

2. Heard the learned Counsel for the petitioner, learned Government Pleader for respondent Nos.1 to 4 and the learned Counsel for respondent No.5.

3. The undisputed facts in the instant case are that one Sri Veera Mallaiah was the original owner of different extents of land situated in Survey Nos.196, 197 and 206 of Madeenaguda Village, Serilingampally Mandal, Ranga Reddy District. He died in the year 1975. The fifth respondent is the son of the said Veera Mallaiah. He appears to have applied for succession certificate in the year 1989, after lapse of 14 years from his fathers death and the same was granted in File No. B/456/89 on 30.03.1989. He did not ask for implementation of the same immediately, but he sought implementation of the same by the fourth respondent and the fourth respondent issued a notice to the petitioner. The petitioner filed his detailed objections. When repeated notices were issued to the petitioner, petitioner filed W.P.No.11635 of 2009 and the same was disposed of at the admission stage on 23.06.2009 directing the fourth respondent to pass appropriate orders after considering the objections filed by the petitioner. The fourth respondent accordingly passed an order in File No.B/371/2008, dated 30.01.2010, ordering mutation of the name of the fifth respondent in revenue records for the year 2009-2010 in respect of the land of an extent of Acs.7.00 in Survey No.196 and Acs.4.28 guntas in Survey No.197 totally admeasuring Acs.11.28 guntas of Madeenaguda Village. In the meanwhile, it appears that Smt. C.Laxmibai and two others, mother and sisters of petitioner, who purchased a part of the property from the vendee of Veera Mallaiah, applied for mutation and the same was ordered by the fourth respondent in File No.B/2568/2003, dated 26.05.2004, for an extent of land admeasuring Acs.4.23 guntas out of the total purchased land of an extent of Acs.5.27 guntas in Survey No.197 purchased under registered sale deed No.999 of 1979 dated 22.05.1979. The petitioner also obtained another mutation proceeding in respect of the land of an extent of Ac.0.10 guntas out of total purchased land of an extent of Ac.0.34 guntas situated in Survey No.197 purchased under registered sale deed No.961 of 1979 dated 18.05.1979 from one Sri Suryanarayana Raju and others, in proceedings No. B/2583/2003 dated 26.05.2004. When the petitioner noticed the name of the fifth respondent in column No.13 of pahani for the years 1982-1983, 1999-2000 and 2000- 2001, he applied to the fourth respondent for deletion of the fifth respondents name from the revenue records in respect of the land in Survey No.197 on 27.09.2006 and the fourth respondent issued proceedings on 17.11.2006 ordering for deletion of the name of the fifth respondent. The said proceedings issued in favour of the petitioner disclosed that the entry in the pahanies of the name of the fifth respondent was with different ink by tampering the records. It was also recorded that the enquiry by the Mandal Revenue Inspector revealed that the land in Survey No.197 (part) was covered by compound wall and certain fruit bearing trees were existing in the site and the land was in possession of the petitioner and by the name of Naren Garden.

4. It appears that the fifth respondent filed O.S.No.3129 of 2006 on the file of the learned Additional Junior Civil Judge, Ranga Reddy District, and filed I.A.No.4330 of 2006 seeking ad interim injunction against the petitioner herein in respect of the land in Survey No.197 admeasuring Acs.6.11 guntas situated at Madeenaguda Village and the said application was dismissed. Though he preferred C.M.A.No.280 of 2008 before the learned I Additional District and Sessions Judge, Ranga Reddy District, it was also dismissed on 11.09.2009. Thus, there is no injunction in favour of the fifth respondent. It is pertinent to notice