Sri K.Balamukunda Chary, v. District Revenue Officer,

HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE A. SHANKAR NARAYANA WRIT PETITION No.18680 of 2005 ORDER:

The instant Writ Petition is filed seeking mandamus to direct respondent No.2 to implement the orders passed by respondent No.1 in proceedings No.B1/5733/1995 dated 21.04.1997 and as confirmed by the Commissioner of Land Administration in Appeal No.TT3/1820/1994 dated 30.07.1999 and issue pahanies after due corrections to the petitioner.

2. The grievance of the petitioner is that he is the absolute owner and possessor of an extent of Acs.6-12 gts comprises in Sy.No.106/2 situated at Balapur village, Saroornagar, Ranga Reddy District. He has referred to various facts as to his acquiring title over the said extent. It is according to him, in view of the dispute with his own brother, Keshava Chary, he approached respondent No.1 under the provisions of A.P.Telangana Area Records of Right Regulation Act of 1358 Fasli by filing a petition under Section 15(2) of the said Act and the same was contested and an order was passed on 21.04.1997 ordering to delete the wrong entries and restore the original entries continued upto 1973-74 by incorporating his name for Sy.No.106/2 admeasuring Acs.6-12 gts. Though a direction was given to respondent No.

2, no action was taken, and, on the other hand, his brother preferred an appeal before the Commissioner of Appeals, Office of Chief Commissioner of Land Administration, Andhra Pradesh, Hyderabad in Appeal No.TT3/1820/1994, who, in turn, on hearing both sides, confirmed the order passed by respondent No.1 on 21.04.1997. Subsequently, he made an application on 19.10.2004 questioning respondent No.2 as to why the order of the Commissioner of Appeals was not implemented. Despite the same, no action was taken by respondent No.2.

Therefore, the aforesaid relief is prayed.

3. None represents the petitioner. Learned Government Pleader for the respondents represents that the direction given by respondent No.1 was carried out and even Memo No.B/425/2009 dated 20.03.2009 was issued and copy of the same was filed along with the counter.

4. A perusal of the said memo would show that the petitioner's name was incorporated concerning an extent of Acs.6-12 gts in Sy.No.106/2 for the year 1974-75 onwards and even the other extent of Acs.2-10 gts was recorded in the name of Keshava Chary in Sy.No.106/4. In that view of the matter, no cause would survive in this writ petition.

5. The Writ Petition is, therefore, dismissed as infructuous. There shall be no order as to costs.

6. As a sequel thereto, miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending in this writ petition, shall stand closed.

___________________________ A. SHANKAR NARAYANA, J 6th November, 2015.

siva