Where a statutory remedy of revision is available under Section 9 of the ROR Act, 1977, the court may direct the aggrieved party to pursue that remedy for the resolution of disputes regarding revenue records and mutation.

Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased topleased to issue a Writ, Order or Direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the 3rd respondent/Revenue Divisional Officer, Nagari Division, Chittoor District, in directing the espondent/Tahsildar, Nagari Mandal, to cancel the petitioner's pattadar pass book and to delete his name from the revenue records in respect of land admeasuring an extent of Ac.4.65 cents situated in Sy.No.87/2A of Nagaraju Kuppam Revenue Village, Nagari Mandal, Chittoor District, as illegal, arbitrary, without jurisdiction, contrary to the provisions of the A.P. Rights in Land and Pattadar Pass Books Act, 1971 , violative of the principles of natural justice and Article 300-A of the Constitution of India, and consequently set aside the same and direct the respondents 1 to 4 to continue the petitioner's name in the revenue records and Pattadar Pass Book and not to interfere with the petitioner's lawful possession and enjoyment of the subject land and to pass

IA NO: 1 OF 2026

Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased pleased to direct the respondents 1 to 4 to continue the petitioner's name in the revenue records and Pattadar Pass Book and not to interfere with the petitioner's lawful possession and enjoyment of the subject land in respect of land admeasuring an extent of Ac.4.65 cents situated in Sy.No.87/2A of Nagaraju Kuppam Revenue Village, Nagari Mandal, Chittoor District pending disposal of the above writ petition and to pass

The Court made the following Order:

Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner, the learned Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue appearing for the respondent Nos.1 to 4 and the learned counsel appearing for the 5th respondent.

2. This writ petition is filed questioning the order of the 3rd respondent dated 19.12.2025 directing the 4th respondent to delete the name of the 1st respondent therein/petitioner herein in the web land adangal, 1-B Register and all other connected revenue records pertaining to the schedule land as mentioned therein by restoring the name of the appellant therein/5th respondent herein as pattadaar and enjoyer of the said extent, ensuring the records align with Khata No.399 and Registered Document No.312/2001 in accordance with the provisions of the ROR Act, 1977 and the rules framed there under.

3. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the 3rd respondent did not appreciate the facts and circumstances of the case and inspite of having judgment and decree in favour of the petitioner herein in O.S.No.179 of 2017 on the file of Senior Civil Judge, Puttur dated 03.10.2017 and the consequential execution proceedings in E.P.No.26 of 2019, the same were not taken into consideration by the said authority while passing the above said impugned order.

4. On the other hand, the learned counsel appearing for the 5th respondent submits that it is an ex-parte decree between the petitioner herein and the judgment debtor by name Mr. Arkadu Krishna Reddy, who is not a party respondent in this writ petition and the 5th respondent is not a party to the said suit proceedings. When the E.A.No.51 of 2024 was filed in the above said execution proceedings of the said judgment and decree dated 03.10.2017, the same was returned with an observation that “the judgment debtor is not in possession of the schedule land and it is an un-executable decree”.

5. In reply, the