ORDER:

This writ petition is filed to declare the action of respondent No.4 in amending the revenue records by incorporating the name of respondent No.5 as pattadar by deleting the name of petitioner in ROR and Adangal/Pahanies in respect of land admeasuring Acs.5-12 gts Sy.No.144/C, Chagapuram Village, Itkyal Mandal, Jogulamba Gadwal district (hereinafter referred to as ‘subject property’), as illegal, arbitrary and contrary to Section 5 (3) of the A.P.Rights in Land and Pattadar Passbook Act,1971 (for short ‘the Act, 1971’) and further to declare the action of respondent No.4 in not considering the representation of petitioner dated 09.07.2020 seeking for restoration of his name by correcting the revenue records in ROR, Adangal/pahanies in respect of aforesaid subject land, as illegal and arbitrary and for consequential relief.

2. Heard Sri Ch. Ravinder, learned counsel for petitioners, Sri S.Krishna Mohan, learned counsel for respondent No.5 and learned Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue.

3. Brief facts of the case as averred in the writ affidavit are that petitioner No.1 is the absolute owner and possessor of the subject property, having inherited the same by way of succession and his name was also mutated in the revenue records. While the matter stood thus, from the year 2019, the name of respondent No.5 was recorded as pattadar in the revenue records and the said mutation was made by respondent No.4 without issuing any notice to petitioner No.1 and without following due procedure as contemplated under law; that petitioner No.1 submitted representation dated 09.07.2020, to respondent No.4, seeking to correct the wrong entries and to restore his name in the revenue records; that on the representation of the petitioner No.1, respondent No.4 directed the VRO to submit a report with regard to subject property; that on 15.07.2020, VRO submitted his report stating that subject property belongs to ancestors of petitioner No.1 and the same has been inherited by petitioner No.1. It is further stated that the name of petitioner No.1 is rounded of and the name of respondent No.5 is incorporated, but no action has been taken by respondent No.4 for correction of wrong entries. Aggrieved by the same, present writ petition is filed.

4. Learned Counsel for petitioners submitted that no notice was issued to petitioners by respondent authorities, while incorporating the name of respondent No.5 in the revenue records in place of petitioner No.1; that correction of entries in revenue records in favour of respondent No.5 is contrary to the Act, 1971 and even as per the report of VRO, the name of father of petitioner No.1 was recorded as pattadar in the revenue records for more than 40 years and after his death, the name of petitioner No.1 was mutated in the revenue records and the same was continued till 2018. He further submitted that petitioner No.1 never sold the subject property to anyone including respondent No.5 and that no document is furnished to the petitioner as to how the name of respondent No.5 was incorporated in the revenue records in respect of subject property. He further submitted that petitioners are still in possession of the subject property; that respondent No.5 is interfering with the peaceful possession of petitioners over the subject property; that petitioner No.1 filed an application vide I.A No.273 of 2019 in OS No.58 of 2018, on the file of Junior Civil Judge, Alampur, seeking injunction against respondent No.5 and the same is pending adjudication and finally, requested to allow the writ petition.

5. Learned Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue by referring to counter of respondent No.4 would submit that petitioner No.1 inherited the subject property by way of succession and his name was also recorded as pattadar in the revenue records; that petitioner No.1 executed a simple deed on 15.07.2004, in favour of respondent No.5 to an extent of Acs.9-00 gts in Sy.No.144/c and 204 of Chagapuram Village and handed