Pursuant to the A.P. Rights in Land & Pattadar Passbooks Act, cancellation of title deeds without proper notice is illegal, necessitating remand for reconsideration under due process.

ORDER :

B. Krishna Mohan, J.

Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners, the learned Assistant Government Pleader for the respondent Nos.1 to 5 and the learned counsel appearing for the 6^th respondent.

2. This writ petition was filed questioning the order in R.P.No. D.Dis.D2/2197/2013, dated 18.12.2025 passed by the 3^rd respondent and also the order in D.Dis.No.3379/11/C, dated 01.06.2013 passed by the 4^th respondent, whereby the pattadar passbooks and title deeds issued in favour of the petitioners to an extent of Ac.12.64 cents each (totaling Ac.37.92 cents) covered by Sy.Nos.150, 151, 152, 153, 155, 321, 329 of K.Bitragunta village, Zarugumilli Mandal, Prakasam District were arbitrarily cancelled, pending declaratory civil suit in O.S. No.144/2010 on the file of Additional District Judge Court, Ongole examine such orders and set aside after declaring the same as illegal, irregular.

3. The petitioners herein are the revision petitioners before the 3^rd respondent dated 18.12.2025. The 6^th respondent is the 1^st respondent therein. It is the grievance of the petitioners that without considering the facts and the legal position, the revisional authority confirmed the orders of the 4^th respondent dated 01.06.2013. The 6^th respondent herein after abnormal delay and during the pendency of the civil suit, approached the 4^th respondent by way of ROR appeal against the proceedings of the 3^rd respondent dated 15.02.2013 and 03.05.2013 in which the petitioners herein filed counter before the said authority. Basing upon the averments of the parties concerned, the following issues are framed by the said appellate authority in his order dated 01.06.2013 which are as under:

Issue No.1: Whether the schedule lands belongs to the Company property or to the individual in capacity?

Issue No.2: Whether the then Tahsildar has violated procedure for grant of PPB/ TDs rules framed under R.O.R. Act or not?

4. The learned counsel for the petitioners submits that, the said issues are also some of the subject issues before the civil suit initiated by the 6^th respondent itself which is pending in O.S. No.144 of 2010 on the file of Additional District Judge, Ongole. But the said appellate authority upon perusal of the registered documents filed by the appellants therein came to a conclusion that the same were purchased by one Mr. N.Venkaiah on behalf of the 6^th respondent herein which is the appellant therein. But noticed that after the death of N.Venkaiah, the pattadar passbook/ title deed was transferred in favour of N.Jessi Lalitha W/o N.Venkaiah by the proceedings of the Mandal Revenue Officer dated 10.03.2003. Accordingly, he further noted the subsequent mutations also in respect of the subject lands. By reproducing the provisions of law, the said appellate authority came to a conclusion that the Form-VIII notice has not been published in the village and also not served on the interested parties by the then Tahsildar. Hence, he opined that the pattadar passbooks/ title deeds were issued in favour of Smt. N.J.Lalitha, Kanuru Subba Rao, Swarna China Subba Rao and Kommapati Bhaskara Rao without following the rules and violating the procedure laid down under Section 5 of A.P. Rights in Land & Pattadar Passbooks Act, 1971. Hence, he has cancelled the said pattadar passbook/ title deeds held in favour of the said persons as under:

5. Further, the 5^th re