Gurram Mohan Rao S/O Venkayya v. The State Of Andhra Pradesh, Rep. By Its Principle

THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE P.NAVEEN RAO WRIT PETITION No.28309 OF 2017 DATED : 23.08.2017 Between :

Gurram Mohan Rao, S/o.Venkayya, Aged about 45 yrs, R/o.D.No.2-38/1, Antervedidevasthanam Village, Sakhinetipalli Mandal, East Godavari District, Andhra Pradesh.

..

Petitioner And The State of Andhra Pradesh, Rep., by Principal Secretary, Revenue Department, A.P.Secretariat, Velagapudi, Guntur, Andhra Pradesh & others .. Respondents This court made the following :

THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE P.NAVEEN RAO WRIT PETITION No.28309 OF 2017 ORDER :

Heard.

2.

Petitioner claims that properties in R.S.Nos.1046/1a, 1046/1b, 1046/1c, 1046/3, 1047/2a, 1047/2b, 1046/2a, 1046/2b, situated at Antervedi Village, Sakhinetipalli Mandal, East Godavari District, are his ancestral properties. While so, the unofficial respondents herein claim the subject properties as belonging to them. However, O.S.No.203 of 2011 on the file of Junior Civil Judge, Razole, instituted by the petitioner was dismissed and petitioner contends that appeal preferred against the said decree is pending before the first appellate Court. While so, alleging that the revenue authorities are undertaking mutation of names of unofficial respondents in the revenue records concerning the above properties, a representation/legal notice is made to Tahsildar, Sakhinetipalli Mandal, not to undertake such exercise and thereon filed this writ petition. 3.

As briefly noted above, petitioner was unsuccessful in obtaining injunction before the trial Court and the suit instituted by him was dismissed. Furthermore, as of now, no decision is made by the Tahsildar who is the original authority to undertake the exercise of correcting the revenue records/mutations of the names of persons, in the revenue records under the Act, 1971 and issue pattedar pass books and title deeds. It appears, so far no such steps are set in motion. Even before the process is set in motion, petitioner cannot seek restraint order against a quasijudicial authority from exercising power vested in him under A.P.

Rights in Land and Pattedar Pass Books Act 1971 (for short 'the Act, 1971'). This Court can exercise extraordinary jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, to undertake judicial review only when a statutory authority errs in exercising jurisdiction or is not vested with jurisdiction to pass orders or such action is malafide. That even before a decision is taken, Court cannot venture into undertake judicial review, more particularly that of power of a quasi-judicial authority. Therefore, this Court is not inclined to entertain the writ petition, and the same is liable to be dismissed.

4.

Accordingly, the Writ Petition is dismissed, leaving it open to the petitioner to work out his remedy available in law, as and when the cause of action arises. There shall be no order as to costs. Miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending in this writ petition shall stand closed.

__________________ P.NAVEEN RAO,J 23rd August, 2017 Rds