THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE K.SARATH

ORDER:

This writ petition is filed questioning the action of the official respondents in not considering the representation of the petitioners for mutation dated 09.12.2021 and petition for correction of revenue records dated 20.12.2021 before the respondent No.3 as illegal and arbitrary and consequently direct the official respondents to delete the name of the respondent No.5 and incorporate the names of the petitioners in respect of the land admeasuring to an extent of Ac.2-24 gts in Sy.No.207 situated at Adibatla Village, Ibrahimpatnam Mandal, Ranga Reddy District. 2. Heard Sri Pasham Krishna Reddy, learned counsel for petitioners and Smt S. Sravanthi, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue for the respondent Nos.1 to 4 and Sri Peri Prabhakar, learned counsel for the respondent No.5.

3. Learned Counsel for the petitioners submits that the father of petitioners namely Rukmini Das was pattadar of the land admeasuring to an extent of Ac:2-24 gts in Sy.No.207 situated at Adibatla Village, Ibrahimpatnam Mandal, Ranga Reddy District and his name was reflected in the pahani up to the year, 1978 and after his death, the petitioners are in possession of the said property by cultivating the land from several decades. When the petitioners have approached the Mandal Revenue Officer for pattadar passbooks, the names of Mr. Mokira Narayana and Anitha Rani were reflected in the pahanies for some time and now in Dharani Portal, the name of the respondent No.5 is shown for the land admeasuring to an extent of Ac.1-12 gts in Sy.No.207/1 and Ac.1-12 gts in Sy.No.207/2 without any valid transaction and without any sale deed from the father of the petitioners or from the petitioners. He further submits that though the petitioners have made a representation to the respondent Nos.3 and 4 on 09.12.2021 and also a petition before the respondent No.2-District Collector, Ranga Reddy on 20.12.2021 for correction of the records, no action has been taken and requested to allow the writ petition by directing the official respondents to consider the representation and the petition filed by the petitioners and pass appropriate orders as per law.

4. Learned Counsel for the respondent No.5 based on the counter submits that one G. Rukmandas S/o.Chenna Kistaiah has executed registered sale deed vide document No.1662 of 1977 in favour of Aakanti Anita Rani w/o. Prakash in respect of land admeasuring to an extent of Ac:2-07 gts in Sy.No.207 and the said extent was rectified to Ac.2-24 gts under Rectification Deed dated 08.07.1977 vide Doc.No.1814 of 1977 and thus, the entire land held by Rukmandas was sold in favour of Aakanti Anita Rani and later her daughters namely Aakanti Neeraja and Barla Jalaja have executed registered sale deeds bearing Doc.Nos.982 of 2021 and 981 of 2021 respectively dated 14.07.2021 in respect of land admeasuring to an extent of Ac.1-12 gts each in Sy.No.207 in favour of the respondent No.5. He further submits that the subject land was sold long back in the year, 1977 itself and ever since the vendor of the respondent No.5 was in possession and enjoyment of the subject land and after purchase, the name of the respondent No.5 was mutated in the revenue records and e-pattadar passbooks were also issued in his favour and his name is reflecting in Dharani Portal in respect of the subject land. He further submits that the petitioners have no right to initiate any proceedings before the Tahsildar and the Revenue Divisional Officer and they are not entitled for correction of records and requested to dismiss the writ petition.

5. After hearing both sides and perusal of the record, this Court is of the considered view that the petitioners are seeking for correction of records basing on their representation dated 09.12.2021 and the petition dated 20.12.2021, but they have not questioned the mutation granted in favour of the unofficial respondent No.5. The respondent No.5 has filed registered documents alo