Judgment : 1. The petitioner seeks for issuance of writ of mandamus, directing the respondents 1 & 2 to cancel the patta issued to the third respondent in Patta No.1618 and consequently restore the same in the petitioner's name by considering his representation dated 15.05.2013. 2. From the averments made in the affidavit filed in support of the affidavit, it is seen that the grievance of the petitioner is that patta has been granted in favour of the third respondent, in respect of the property in S.No.250/1, which according to the petitioner is his ancestral property and patta should not have been granted in favour of the third respondent. Therefore, the petitioner prays that his representation should be considered by the respondents 1 & 2. Patta in respect of the third respondent is said to be set aside. If that is so, the petitioner has to file an appeal before the appropriate forum under Section 11 of the Patta Pass Book Act. He therefore, sought for a direction to the respondents 1 & 2. 3. A writ of mandamus cannot be granted more particularly when no notice has been ordered to the third respondent and the writ petition is pending at the stage of admission for more than a year. While declining the relief sought for, the petitioner is at liberty to file an appeal petition before the first respondent in proper format. If such an appeal petition is filed, the first respondent shall consider the same, after issuing notice to the petitioner and the third respondent and to any such person who is likely to be aggrieved, and pass orders in accordance with law. 4. With the above direction, this writ petition is disposed of. No costs.