COMMON ORDER :

KIRANMAYEE MANDAVA, J.

Since the issues involved in both the cases are one and the same, it is deemed appropriate to pass ‘Common Order’ in the cases.

2. The W.P.No.18204 of 2021 is filed seeking a Writ of Prohibition to declare the proceedings of the 3^rd respondent in entertaining Appeal No.Roc.G/152/2021, filed by respondent Nos.5 and 6 (writ petitioners in W.P.No.10776 of 2021) as not maintainable.

3. The W.P.No.10776 of 2021 is filed challenging the action of the Revenue Divisional Officer in not disposing of the appeal filed against the proceedings of the Mandal Revenue Officer in refusing to mutate the names of the writ petitioners (unofficial respondents 5 & 6 in W.P. No.18204 of 2021) in the revenue records.

4. For adjudication of issues involved in both the Writ Petitions, the parties hereinafter are referred to as arrayed in W.P.No.18204 of 2021.

5. It is contended by the petitioners that originally, the subject property belong to one Talupuri Seshachalaiah, and Talupuri Kumaraswamy. They had given the subject land on Saswatha Muchilika i.e. Permanent Lease in 1918 vide registered lease deed dated 07.11.1918 in favour of one Karanam Narayanaswamy Pillai. The said K. Narayaswamy Pillai was in possession and enjoyment of the said land during his lifetime. After his demise, his two sons Karanam Subbaraya Pillai and Karanam Kuppuswamy Pillai, were given rough patta in the year 1957 under the provisions of Andhra Pradesh (Andhra Area) Estates (Abolition and Conversion into Ryotwari) Act, 1948.

6. After the grant of ‘Rough Patta’ in favour of the said Karanam Subbaraya Pillai and Karanam Kuppuswamy Pillai, their names were recorded in Fair Land Adangal and the relevant revenue records. A joint ryotwari passbook was also issued in favour of Karanam Subbaraya Pillai and Karanam Kuppuswamy Pillai, in 1986. After their demise, the names of their respective family members were mutated in the revenue records.

7. It is further contended that partition was affected between the branches of the two families of Karanam Subbaraya Pillai and Karanam Kuppuswamy Pillai, represented by the 1^st petitioner Smt. K. Devaki and N. Damodhara Pillai respectively, through a registered partition deed dated 27.10.2018 vide Document bearing No.4837/18. After the said partition, the respective share holders were given their respective shares in terms of the said partition deed. Thereafter, after the demise of Sri N. Damodhara Pillai, husband of the 2^nd petitioner, a partition took place amongst his family members vide registered partition deed dated 07.07.2020 bearing Document No.2129/2020.

8. It is contended that the petitioners and their ancestors are in occupation and enjoyment of the subject property since 1918, by virtue of a rough patta granted in favour of ancestors of the petitioners.

9. It is further contended that the unofficial respondents 5 & 6 based on a fraudulent sale deed dated 05.07.1965, are claiming right over the property, and has approached the Tahsildar to cancel the entries made in the names of petitioners and their predecessors. It is contended that the Tahsildar, the 4^th respondent herein rightly rejected the claim of the unofficial respondents 5 & 6. Against which unofficial respondents 5 & 6 filed an appeal before the 3^rd respondent. It is contended that the 3^rd respondent has no jurisdiction to entertain such an appeal.

10. It is further contended by the petitioners that even before any notice was issued by the RDO, to the petitioners herein, in the appeal filed by the unofficial respondents 5 & 6, the unofficial respondents 5 & 6 filed writ petition in W.P.No.10776 of 2021 challenging the alleged inaction on the part of the RDO in taking up the appeal and passing orders thereon. In the said writ petition, pending disposal of the said Writ Petition, interim directions were granted to maintain status quo in all respects.

11. The learned Senior Counsel Sri O. Manohar Reddy, appearing for Sri O.Udaya Kumar, learned counsel