ORDER : 1. The petitioners in the present writ petition are the plaintiffs, who secured a decree in their favour by the Judgment and Decree dated 30.06.2017 in O.S. No. 50 of 2005. 2. The sole defendant in the suit is the sibling of plaintiff No. 1 and daughter of plaintiff No. 2. The gift and settlement deeds that were executed by the defendant in favour of the plaintiffs were sought to be revoked, thereby giving a cause of action to the plaintiffs to approach the Civil Court. 3. It is stated at the bar that the XIII Additional District Judge, (FTC), Vijayawada passed the decree upon proper contest by the parties. A copy of the Decree dated 30.06.2017 passed by the XIII Additional District Judge, (FTC), Vijayawada in O.S. No. 50 of 2005 is filed as Ex.P2 along with this writ petition. 4. The terms of the Decree granted in favour of the plaintiffs/writ petitioners are as under: “This original suit coming before me on 09.06.2017 in the presence of Sri Chekuri Sreepathi Rao, Muppa Rajashakar, Advocates for plaintiffs and of Sri A. Sudhakar Rao, Advocate for defendant and upon perusing the material papers on record and upon perusing the documents, today this Court doth order and decree: 1. that the suit be and the same is hereby decreed with costs declaring that Ex.A16 registered revocation deed vide document No. 1543/2005 and Ex.A17 registered revocation deed vide document No. 1544/2005 of SRO, Gunadala be and are hereby declared as void which was executed by the defendant in respect of plaint schedule properties. 2. that 1st plaintiff be and hereby is declared as absolute owner of the plaint schedule property under Ex.A14 registered settlement deed dated 17.03.2005 vide document No. 985/2005. 3. that the 2nd plaintiff be and hereby declared as absolute owner of the plaint schedule property under Ex.A15 registered settlement deed dated 17.03.2005 vide document No. 986/2005. 4. that the defendant do pay the plaintiff a sum of Rs. 2,91,400/- towards suit costs and do bear her own suit costs of Rs. Nil/-.” 5. It is also stated at the bar that this decree dated 30.06.2017 had attained finality inter se the parties. 4. that the defendant do pay the plaintiff a sum of Rs. 2,91,400/- towards suit costs and do bear her own suit costs of Rs. Nil/-.” 5. It is also stated at the bar that this decree dated 30.06.2017 had attained finality inter se the parties. Thereafter, the plaintiffs have submitted a representation before the Sub- Registrar, Gunadala, Vijayawada, Krishna District requesting the authority to cancel the entry in their office records about the revocation deed executed by the sole defendant dated 13.04.2005 vide document Nos. 1543 and 1544 and record the cancellation as per the Judgment and Decree dated 30.06.2017. 6. It is stated at the bar by the learned counsel for the writ petitioners Mr. D. Anil Kumar that till date, the authorities have not acted upon the request and deleted the revocation deeds. Learned counsel for the writ petitioners has drawn the attention of this Court to Ex.P3 namely the extract of the registry. At S. No. 7 of the Statement of Encumbrance on Property, obtained on 09.10.2018, indicates that the authority has not acted upon the requisition made by the writ petitioners because in column No. 3, the revocation made by the defendant of the gift/settlement deed is still reflected. 7. Mr. S. Satish, learned Government Pleader for Revenue appearing for the official respondents herein had stated that if the writ petitioners would make a fresh application, the same may be considered by the official respondents. 8. It is an admitted fact that the representation was submitted by the writ petitioners on 22.11.2017 in pursuance of the decree dated 30.06.2017 which had attained finality, and which is still pending determination. 9. In that view of the matter, this Court directs the respondent No. 3 to respond and initiate suitable action within a period of three weeks from the date of receipt of the certified copy of this order and shall file sworn affidavit as regards the compliance or otherwise with reasons within three weeks thereafter, in any case well before the next date of listing. 10. In terms of the observations made herein above, this writ petition is allowed. Rule nisi made absolute. There shall be no order as to costs. 11. Post on 12.07.2022 for compliance. 12. Miscellaneous petitions, if any pending, also stand closed.