Key Points: - The petitioner seeks to declare the action of not mutating his name in ROR and Adangal for Ac.1.30 cents in Sy.No.152, S. Lingamdinne Village, Gonegandla Mandal, Kurnool District, as illegal/arbitrary and to direct mutation (!) (!) - The Court considers whether a direction can be issued to mutate the petitioner’s name in Form-1B under the Act given lack of proper application and compliance with statutory requirements (!) - The court held that in the absence of a proper application through Mee-Seva with requisite fee, the Tahsildar is not obliged to act, and inaction cannot be deemed illegal/arbitrary; thus mandamus relief is denied (!) - The Court relied on statutory requirements under Section 4, Section 5(3) of the Act and Rule 19(1) of the Rules to determine maintainability of the petition (!) - Prior directions from W.P.No.23961 of 2014 regarding pattadar passbooks and title deeds were not implemented, impacting petitioner's relief (!) (!) - Respondents 5 and 6 contend petitioner lacks title and that sale deed vendor had no title; petitioner's relief denied due to lack of proof of title and non-compliance with procedures (!) (!) - The petition is dismissed with no costs; miscellaneous petitions closed (!) (!)

What is the legal question regarding mutation of name in revenue records under the Andhra Pradesh Rights in Land and Pattadar Pass Books Act, 1971?