appurtenant land, but the Civil Court vide judgment dt.22.09.1978 in O.P.No.242 of 1972 (Old O.P.No.80 of 1959) declared that the Nizam was the absolute owner of land in Survey No.318/1 and was entitled to receive compensation in proportion to the extent of 7,096.3 sq.yards from out of the extent of 7,659 sq. yards acquired in survey No.318/1 of Gaddiannaram Village; that in Sethwar of 1942, in the Chowfaslas, in the Kasra Pahani of 1954-55, in the Sesala Pahanies and in the subsequent pahanies upto 1959-60, the Nizam was shown as owner and occupant; and the P.A. to Collector had examined these aspects and rightly held that the deletion of the name of the Nizam by the Patwari was made mischievously without the orders of the competent authority and passed orders for rectification of the mistake. He also rejected the contention of the Government Pleader that Revenue Courts of the State Government do not have jurisdiction to decide the issue of title in respect of property mentioned in the Blue Book unless the authority is nominated by the Government of India stating that it is not relevant. He held that the orders of the P.A. to Collector are only in respect of correction of village accounts, but not for deletion, alteration or addition in the Blue Book. He held that it is within the jurisdiction of the Revenue Court envisaged under the A.P. (Telangana Area) Record of Rights in Land Regulation, 1358 Fasli and the Government could not explain the changes made in the title of the suit land as having been done with valid authority; therefore, such
