The court emphasized the necessity of following procedural requirements and the principle of natural justice in amending entries in the Record of Rights, ruling that the respondent acted without jurisdiction.

ORDER :

K. SARATH, J.

1. This Writ Petition is filed questioning impugned orders passed by the respondent No.3 in file No.L/867/2015 dated 04.10.2016 whereunder the appeal filed by the unofficial respondent No.5 was allowed and the directed the Tahsildar/Respondent No.4 to delete the names of petitioners in the occupation column in pahanies in respect of the lands admeasuring to an extent of Ac.1.20 guntas in Sy.No.307 situated at Inapur Village and an another extent of Ac.3.14 guntas in Sy.No.124/A situated at Ramasagar Village of Cheriyal Mandal.

2. Heard the learned Counsel for the petitioners and the learned Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue and the learned Counsel for the unofficial respondents and perused the record.

3. The learned Counsel for the petitioners would submit that the unofficial respondent No.5 and one Banala Sambaiah have jointly purchased agricultural lands admeasuring to an extent of Ac.6.28 guntas in Sy.No.124 of Ramasagar Village of Cheriyal Revenue Mandal under a registered sale deed No.841/1986 dated 24.08.1986 and another extent of Ac.2.20 guntas in Sy.No.307 of Inapur Village of Cheriyal Mandal (hereinafter referred to ‘as subject lands’) and their names were also mutated in the revenue records and allotted sub-division Nos.124/A and 124/B in respect of lands of Ramasagar Village. Subsequently, the said unofficial respondent No.5 and Banala Sambaiah have jointly sold the subject lands on 17.04.2000 to the petitioners through two simple sale deeds and also handed over possession to the petitioners agreeing to execute the sale deeds as and when demanded by the petitioners. Subsequently, when the petitioners approached the unofficial respondent No.5 and Banala Sambaiah to execute the sale deeds in terms of simple sale deeds, the unofficial respondent No.5 postponed on one pretext or the other, however, Banala Sambaiah executed sale deed No.1236/2012 dated 30.03.2012 in respect of lands in Sy.No.124/B to an extent of Ac.2.27 guntas of Ramasagar Village and another sale deed No.1237/2012 dated 30.03.2012 in respect of land admeasuring to an extent of Ac.1.00 guntas in favour of the wife of the petitioner No.1 and petitioner No.2 and got mutated their names and also obtained pattadar pass books in respect of the said lands.

4. The learned Counsel for the petitioners would further submitted that while the matters stood thus, the unofficial respondent No.5 filed O.S.No.318/2012 on the file of Additonal Junior Civil Judge, Jangaon against the petitioners for perpetual injunction in respect of the subject lands and subsequently withdrawn. During the pendency of said suit, the unofficial respondent No.5 filed application before the Respondent No.3 questioning entries in the revenue records in the name of the petitioners and to enter his name in respect of the subject lands, however, without any jurisdiction, the respondent No.3, passed impugned orders deleting the names of the petitioners and ordered to enter the name of the unofficial respondent No.5.

5. The learned Counsel for the petitioners would further submit that as per Section 3 (3) of the A.P Rights in Land and Pattadar Pass Books Act, 1971 (for short ‘ROR Act’), if any person effected by an entry in such Record of Rights may within a period of one year they have to sought rectification of the entries. The unofficial respondent No.5 filed appeal before the respondent No.3 in the year, 2015 seeking correction in the occupation column in respect of pahanies for the year 2012-13. Beyond one year, if the person wants to seek rectification of entries in ROR the aggrieved party has to file revision before the District Collector under Secton 9 of the ROR Act, but the unofficial respondent No.