ORDER :

This petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking the following relief:-

“….to issue a Writ order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Certiorari, calling for the records pertaining to the orders dated 17/05/2021 in D.Dis.A/368/2020 passed by Respondent No.4, quash the same by declaring them as illegal, arbitrary, violative of Principles of Natural Justice, violative of Articles 14, 21 and 300-A of the Constitution of India, without jurisdiction, beyond the scope of the provision of the A.P. ROR Act, 1971 and consequently direct Respondent No.4 to mutate the name of petitioner for the land admeasuring Ac.10.52 cents in R.S.No.914 situated in Damineedu Village, Tirupati Rural Mandal, Chittoor District, issue Pattadar Passbooks and Title Deeds in favour of petitioner and pass such other order…”

2. It is the case of petitioner that petitioner’s grandfather along with his brother filed Claim Petition for grant of Ryotwari Joint Patta under Section 11(a) of Estate Abolition Act, 1948, before the Assistant Settlement Officer, Chittoor. As per the rules, the Assistant Settlement Officer has issued notices to the concerned, conducted enquiry, passed orders on 18.11.1966 vide proceedings in S.R.No.493/11(a)/64/PN/CCR by allowing the petition and granted joint Ryotwari Patta in favour of petitioner’s grandfather and his brother namely Gujjireddy @ Munuswami Reddy. In the said orders, it was categorically stated that petitioner’s grandfather along with his brother are enjoying the land for the past 35 years by cultivating and raising dry crops. By virtue of said orders, petitioner’s grandfather and his brother were in possession and enjoyment of the subject property, they were issued Pattadar pass books and title deeds in their favour. Said Gujjireddy @ Munuswami, who is brother of petitioner’s grandfather was unmarried. Petitioner’s grandfather and his brother Gujjireddy expired, thereupon, the petitioner’s father namely V.Venkateswara Reddy succeeded the entire estate. Petitioner’s father also died in the year 1995. At the time of demise of his father, the petitioner was an young boy, he was not aware of the land details and the documents pertaining to said land and he could not secure the documents. Subsequently, the petitioner applied for mutation of his name in respect of subject property in the revenue records and also made several representations to the revenue authorities. In pursuance of orders passed by this Court, 4th respondent issued a notice to the petitioner asking him to submit relevant documents. All of sudden, 4th respondent issued an endorsement, dated 17.05.2021 vide D.Dis.A/368/2020 refusing the claim of petitioner for mutating his name in revenue records for various extents of land in Sy.No.91/4 of Damineedu Village of Tirupati Rural Mandal. Said endorsement is now challenged on various grounds and one such ground is that non-compliance of proviso to Section 5(1) of Andhra Pradesh Rights in Land and Pattadar Pass Books Act, 1971. As the respondents did not comply proviso to Section 5(1) of the Act, the endorsement is liable to be set aside and requested to issue direction to the respondents as claimed in the writ petition.

3. During hearing, Sri P.S.P. Suresh Kumar, learned counsel for petitioner reiterated the contentions urged in the affidavit filed along with the writ petition, while drawing the attention of this Court to the pendency of other writ petition in W.P.No.7980 of 2020 before this Court, but he has distinguished the facts of above case and the facts of the present case. Such disputed fact in the present writ petition is irrelevant to give intimation under Section 4 of A.P. Rights in Lands and Pattdar Pass Books Act, 1991 and non-compliance of proviso to Section 5(1) of A.P. Rights in Lands and Pattadar Pass Books Act, 1991 besides other contentions.

4. Whereas, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue would submit that since W.P.No.7980 of