Point of law: When the quasi judicial authority entertained an Appeal, a writ of mandamus cannot be issued, since it is only to prohibition from proceeding with the appeal. Writ of Prohibition can be issued by exercising power under Article 226 of the Constitution of India.

ORDER :

1. This writ petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India by one Annamraju Venkata Raghavendra @ Raghu, challenging the jurisdiction of Respondent No.3/Revenue Divisional Officer in entertaining Appeal No.A/197/2021 and issuing Notice dated 07.04.2021 for cancellation of title deed of the petitioner as illegal, arbitrary, without jurisdiction and consequently set-aside the proceedings in Appeal No.A/197/2021 on the file of the third respondent.

2. It is the case of the petitioner that, father of the petitioner inherited land admeasuring an extent of Ac.2-35 cents in Sy.No.96/2 and Ac.2-35 cents in Sy.No.105/2, which is a patta land. The name of petitioner’s father was also reflecting in RSR and mutated in the revenue records in the year 1908 for the above two survey numbers, based on which pattadar passbooks and title deeds were issued to petitioner’s father vide Patta No.601.

3. Father of the fifth respondent filed E.P.No.74 of 1996 in O.S.No.28 of 1995 for failure to discharge the decree debt. The schedule property was brought to sale. Later, father of this petitioner, who is the plaintiff/decree holder purchased the same. Similarly, E.P.No.92 of 1994 in O.S.No.21 of 1993 was also filed in which also father of this petitioner, plaintiff/decree holder purchased the schedule land. Thus, schedule property totaling to an extent of Ac.11-00 cents in Sy.Nos.96, 105 and 106 respectively belong to the petitioner’s father. Thus, the petitioner’s father became owner of the land and he had been in possession and enjoyment of the property during his lifetime.

4. All of sudden, in the year 2021, the Respondent Nos.4 & 5 filed an appeal before the third respondent vide Rc.A/197/2021 under Section 5(5) of the Andhra Pradesh Rights in Land and Pattadar Pass books Act, 1971 (for short ‘the Act’), for cancellation of the title deed of the petitioner which was granted long back, but just because his father purchased some extents in Sy.Nos.96, 105 and 106 respectively. On improper consideration of the application, Respondent No.3/Revenue Divisional Officer, Markapuram issued notice to the petitioner dated 07.04.2021 treating the application as an appeal without any authority of law and therefore, the proceedings are challenged before this Court and requested to declare the same as illegal, arbitrary and violative of Article 14 of the Constitution of India.

5. Respondent No.3 – Revenue Divisional Officer, Markapuram filed counter affidavit, denying material allegations, inter alia contending that, Sri Golla Mallikarjuna Vara Prasad filed appeal under Section 5(5) of the Act to call for the records relating to an extent of Ac.4-00 cents in Sy.No.96, 105 and an extent of Ac.7-00 cents in Sy.Nos.96 & 106 and conduct enquiry, and to delete the name of the first respondent’s father for the land in Sy.No.96/2, 105/2 an extent of Ac.4-70 cents. Respondent No.5 stated in his Appeal petition that the suits were decreed in favour of his father on the file of Senior Civil Judge, Markapur and later his father purchased the said lands in the auction conducted by Senior Civil Judge Court, Markapur and was confirmed by the Court vide E.P.No.74 of 1996 in O.S.No.28 of 1995 dated 09.06.1998 in respect of lands situated in Sy.Nos.96 and 105 measuring an extent of Ac.4-00 cents. Similarly other land purchased in auction conducted by Senior Civil Judge Court, Markapur and was confirmed by the Court vide E.P.No.92 of 1994 in O.S.No.21 of 1993 dated 9.07.1997 in respect of lands situated in Sy.Nos.96,106 and 105 measuring an extent of Ac.7-00 cents and the land is in the possession of his father till his demise and later they inherited and divided into two equal shares and obtained pattadar passbooks and enjoying the land. While so, the petitioner is trying to trespass into their lands basing on the fake pattadar passbooks obtained fraudulently by the petitioner. Hence, he filed the appeal under the provisions of the Act, for deletion of bogus