ORDER:

The present Writ Petition came to be filed under Article

226 of the Constitution of India seeking the following relief:-

“to issue a Writ of Mandamus or any other appropriate Writ or direction declaring the order of the 4th respondent passed in RCF 5063/2014 dated 04.12.2014 as illegal, arbitrary and contrary to the provisions of Section 5(3) of the A.P. Rights in Land and Pattadar Pass Book Act, 1971 and also in violation of principles of natural justice and consequently direct the 4th respondent to restore the original entries in the revenue records”.

2. The case of the petitioners is that the land admeasuring an extent of Ac.3.25 cents in Sy.Nos.80A-1, 80-B, 81, 85 belongs to the petitioners’ joint family. After demise of the petitioners’ father, on 21.06.2006, the petitioners are in possession of the said property and their names were also mutated in the revenue records. The petitioners’ mother Smt. Lakshmikanthamma filed O.S.No.784 of 2008 on the file of the Principal Junior Civil Judge, Nellore seeking injunction restraining the petitioners from interfering with her alleged possession of the plaint schedule property. In the said suit, the petitioners’ mother also filed an application vide I.A.No.671 of

2008 seeking temporary injunction which was dismissed on 02.12.2009. In the said suit, the petitioners’ mother claimed an extent of Ac.2.25 cents in the above said property on the ground that the petitioners’ father executed a registered settlement deed in her faovur, which came to the notice of the petitioners only after receiving a copy of the plaint in O.S.No.784 of 2008.

(a) Thereafter, the petitioners also filed O.S.No.38 of

2009 on the file of the V Additional District Judge, Nellore seeking partition and separate possession of the above mentioned property. In the said suit, the petitioners filed I.A.No.312 of 2009 seeking injunction restraining the defendants therein from alienating the plaint schedule property. The said petition was allowed on 16.03.2009. Notwithstanding the injunction orders granted by the Court, the petitioners’ mother executed settlement deed on 18.01.2010 in favour of the petitioners’ fourth sister settling the property in her favour. Thereafter, the petitioners’ third and fourth sisters executed an agreement of sale-cum-GPA in favour of the respondents 6 and 7 on 19.08.2010.

(b) On the basis of the said agreement of sale-cum-

GPA, the 7th respondent filed O.S.No.891 of 2010 on the file of the III Additional Junior Civil Judge, Nellore seeking permanent injunction restraining the petitioners from interfering with their alleged possession. The petitioners got issued legal notices on 04.10.2009, 24.03.2014 and 30.11.2014 to the respondents 2 to 5 requesting them not to entertain any application made by the petitioners 6 to 9 to mutate their names in the revenue records with respect to land to an extent of Ac.3.25 cents in Sy.Nos.80A-1, 80-B, 81, 85 in the revenue records which was acknowledged by them. On an application made by the 8th respondent for grant of pattadar passbook and title deeds on 10.01.2011 with respect to the land admeasuring an extent of Ac.0.50 cents in Sy.Nos.81 and 85, the 4th respondent rejected the same vide endorsement dated 29.04.2011 referring to the report of the 5th respondent regarding the pendency of the suit and the interim order passed by the Court.

3. The main grievance of the writ petitioners in the present case is that recently, when the petitioners obtained copies of the Adangals through Mee-seva on 20.12.2014, surprisingly they came to know that the names of the respondents 6 to 9 were shown as enjoyers to the said property even though the petitioners are in physical possession of the same. On an enquiry, the petitioners came to know that the 4th respondent passed orders on 04.12.2014 mutating the names of the unofficial respondents herein in the revenue Adangals with respect to the land to an extent of Ac.3.25 cents in Sy.Nos.80A-1, 80-B, 81, 85, without any