ORDER : 1. This writ petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, seeking the following relief: “....to issue a writ order or direction more particularly one in the nature of writ of mandamus, declaring the action of the respondents 3 to 5 herein in not implementing the order of the 2nd respondent herein passed in R. Dis. No. REV-SWLAO-DOT/46/2020, dated 8.4.2020, as illegal, arbitrary and violative of Article 300-A of the Constitution of India and contrary to Sections 9 and 10 of the A.R Dotted Lands (Updated in Re-Settlement Register) Act, 2017 and consequently direct the respondents 3 to 5 to update the petitioner's name in all the revenue records including digitally maintained records for the lands in an extent of Ac. 0-80 cents in Sy. No. 135/1A, Ac. 0-10 cents in Sy. No. 135/2, Ac. 0-55 cents in Sy. No. 135/3, Ac. 0-25 cents in Sy. No. 135/5 and Ac. 0-20 cents in Sy. No. 135/6, totally Ac. 1-90 cents situated at Cherlopalli Village, C.K. Dinne Mandal, YSR Kadapa District and to delete the subject lands from the List of Prohibited Property under Section 22-A of the Registration Act, 1908 and receive, register and release the documents, if any presented for registration by the petitioner herein and pass such other order.” 2. The case of petitioner in nutshell is that the land in Sy. Nos. 135 and 136 of Cherlopalli Village, C.K. Dinne Mandal, YSR Kadapa District was originally Government land, on 26.9.1936, the land in an extent of Acs. 4.99 cents was assigned to one Settipalli Subbamma vide proceedings D.A. Dis. No. 1598-1346. Likewise, an extent of Ac. 5.20 cents in Sy. Nos. 135 and 136 was assigned on 21.2.1939 to one C. Konda Reddy vide DA Dis. No. 1698-1348, dated 21.2.1939. The said assignees continued in possession and after their demise, their legal heirs continued in possession. 3. On 29.3.1971, legal heirs of the above said assignees sold the subject lands under registered sale deeds vide Document Nos. 980 of 1971 and 983 of 1971. Thereafter, the lands were changed from so many persons vide Registered Document Nos. 1783 of 1973, 2976 of 2004, 9174 of 2005 and 286 of 2007. Finally, on 11.6.2013, the petitioner alongwith one G. Chandra Sekhar Reddy jointly purchased Ac. 980 of 1971 and 983 of 1971. Thereafter, the lands were changed from so many persons vide Registered Document Nos. 1783 of 1973, 2976 of 2004, 9174 of 2005 and 286 of 2007. Finally, on 11.6.2013, the petitioner alongwith one G. Chandra Sekhar Reddy jointly purchased Ac. 3.80 cents under a registered sale deed vide Document No. 3722 of 2013, came into possession and continued in possession of the property. According to RSR, the subject lands were classified as dotted lands. 4. On 9.10.2019, the petitioner made an application to update revenue records as per Section 6 of the A.P. Dotted Lands (Updated in Re-Settlement Register) Act, 2017 and also for deletion of the subject lands from the Prohibited list published under Section 22-A of the Registration Act, 1908 before the revenue authorities. Accordingly, his claim was placed before the District Level Committee on 10.2.2020. The District Level Committee after considering the claim of petitioner, relevant revenue records and report of Tahsildar/3rd respondent, allowed his claim. 5. Accordingly, the 2nd respondent herein vide Proceedings in R. Dis. No. REV-SWLAO-DOT/46/2020, dated 8.4.2020 directed the Tahsildar-3rd respondent to update the name of the petitioner in all the revenue records including digital records and also directed the 4th respondent to instruct the 5th respondent to take steps to delete the subject land from the Prohibited List. Further, no appeal under Section 8 of A.P. Dotted Lands (Updated in Re-Settlement Register) Act, 2017 was carried against the order of the 2nd respondent herein and it attained finality. 6. The petitioner received a message to his phone from Government of A.P. website saying that his application for updation and issuance of Pattadar Pass Book and Title Deed was accepted/approved by the 3rd respondent and he is asked to get the same through Mee Seva or Mee Bhoomi website. From that day onwards, the petitioner is frequently visiting Mee Seva for Pattadar Pass Book and Title Deed. But, no such order was implemented. 7. According to Section 9 of the A.P. Dotted Lands (Updated in Re-Settlement Register) Act, 2017, the 3rd respondent herein has to update all the revenue records including digitally maintained records, within a period of one month. But, no such order was implemented. 7. According to Section 9 of the A.P. Dotted Lands (Updated in Re-Settlement Register) Act, 2017, the 3rd respondent herein has to update all the revenue records including digitally maintained records, within a period of one month. Similarly, according to Section 10 of the above said Act, the dotted lands which were covered by the order passed under Section 7 of the Act shall be deleted from the Prohibited List within one month from the date of order. But, the order was not complied in terms of Section 10 of the Act. Hence, the inaction of the respondents 3 to 5 is now questioned in the present writ petition and sought a direction as stated supra. 8. During hearing, Sri. G. Ramesh Babu reiterated the contentions urged in the writ petition and drawn the attention of this Court to the order passed by the Chairman, District Level Committee for deletion of the lands from the List of Prohibited Property and also Dotted Lands List vide Proceedings in R. Dis. No. REV-SWLAO-DOT/46/2020, dated 8.4.2020. He has also drawn the attention of this Court to the provisions of the Act, more particularly to Sections 9 and 10 of the Act and on the strength of the order in Vallepu Chenchu Krishnaiah vs. State of Andhra Pradesh, 2020 SCC Online A.P. 3732, requested to issue a direction to the respondents. 9. Whereas, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Stamps and Registration would contend that if there is a direction by the Chairman of District Level Committee it has to be implemented in terms of Sections 9 and 10 of the Act and requested to pass appropriate orders, if the circumstances permits. 10. Undoubtedly, the petitioner purchased the lands in an extent of Ac. 0-80 cents in Sy. No. 135/1A, Ac. 0-10 cents in Sy. No. 135/2, Ac. 0-55 cents in Sy. No. 135/3, Ac. 0-25 cents in Sy. No. 135/5 and Ac. 0-20 cents in Sy. No. 135/6, totalling Ac. 1-90 cents situated at Cherlopalli Village, C.K. Dinne Mandal, YSR Kadapa District under a registered sale deed and an application was made by the petitioner under Section 6 of the A.P. Dotted Lands (Updated in Re-Settlement Register) Act, 2017 for deletion of those lands from Dotted Lands List, in RSR and also in List of Prohibited Property published under Section 22-A of the Registration Act, 1908. 11. 11. On the basis of the said application, the Chairman, District Level Committee, the 2nd respondent herein issued Proceedings vide R. Dis. No. REV-SWLAO-DOT/46/2020, dated 8.4.2020, while answering, in Para 4 held as follows: “Para 4: In the circumstances explained in Para No. (3) above, the application of Sri. Kavali Sekhar S/o Kavali Venkata Subbaiah, resident of Kadapa Town and Mandal, YSR District for deletion of an extent of Ac. 0-80 cents in Sy. No. 135/1A3, Ac. 0-10 cents in Sy. No. 135/2B, Ac. 0-55 cents in Sy. No. 135/3C, Ac. 0-25 cents in Sy. No. 135/5B and Ac. 0-20 cents in Sy. No. 135/16B, total extent Ac. 1-90 cents of Cherlopalli Village from the list of prohibited properties under Section 22-A(1) and for updation in RSR of Cherlopalli Village, C.K. Dinne Mandal as per the A.P. Dotted Lands (Updation in Re-Settlement Register) Act, 2017 as private patta land is hereby considered and declared as private patta land as per the Act No. 10 of 2017 (The A.P. Dotted Lands (Updation in Re-Settlement Register) Act, 2017).” And further concluded at Para 7 as follows: “Para 7: The Tahsildar, C.K. Dinne is directed to take necessary action accordingly and mutate in the Revenue records.” 12. After passing order by the Chairman, District Level Committee, the order shall be implemented by the Tahsildar-3rd respondent herein and the Sub-Registrar-5th respondent herein to delete those lands from the concerned Prohibitory List, Dotted Lands List and in RSR in terms of Sections 9 and 10 of the Act. 13. Section 9 of the Andhra Pradesh Dotted Lands (Updation in Re-Settlement Register) Act, 2017 deals with Updation of Re-Settlement Register. The Updation of Re-Settlement Register and consequent updation of other revenue records, including digitally maintained records, in pursuance of the orders passed under Section 7 or Section 8 as the case may be, shall be made within one (1) month. 14. Similarly Section 10 of the Andhra Pradesh Dotted Lands (Updation in Re-Settlement Register) Act, 2017 deals with Deletion under Section 22-A(1) of the Registration Act, 1908. 14. Similarly Section 10 of the Andhra Pradesh Dotted Lands (Updation in Re-Settlement Register) Act, 2017 deals with Deletion under Section 22-A(1) of the Registration Act, 1908. The Dotted Lands updated in the name of Person in Column No. (16) of Re-Settlement Register shall be deleted from the list of prohibitory lands notified under Section 22-A(1) of the Registration Act, 1908 (Act No. 16 of 1908) as amended by the Andhra Pradesh Act No. 19 of 2007 within one (1) month of the date of the order under Section 7 or Section 8 as the case may be. 15. The petitioner made an application in terms of Section 6 of the A.P. Dotted Lands (Updated in Re-Settlement Register) Act, 2017 and the same was disposed of by order dated 8.4.2020 issuing a direction as extracted above. But, the Tahsildar did not implement the direction given by the Chairman, District Level Committee and the inaction of the respondents 3 to 5 is contrary to Sections 9 and 10 of the Andhra Pradesh Dotted Lands (Updation in Re-Settlement Register) Act, 2017. Therefore, the inaction of the respondents 3 to 5 is illegal and arbitrary in view of the law declared by this Court in Vallepu Chenchu Krishnaiah's case (supra). 16. In those circumstances, this Court has no option except to issue a direction to the respondents 3 to 5 to implement the orders issued by the Chairman, District Level Committee, the 2nd respondent herein, within a month from today. In view of the aforesaid discussion, I find that the inaction of the respondents is illegal and arbitrary. 17. In the result, this writ petition is allowed directing the respondents 3 to 5 to implement the orders of the Chairman, District Level Committee, the 2nd respondent herein vide Proceedings in R. Dis. No. REV-SWLAO-DOT/46/2020, dated 8.4.2020, within one month from today and failure to implement the said order may lead to serious consequences. There shall be no order as to costs. 18. As a sequel miscellaneous applications, pending, if any, shall also stand closed.