Writ petition challenging inaction to mutate name in webland records in order to compel subdivision, dismissed for failure to follow statutory MeeSeva application procedure. Liberty granted to apply properly.
Writ Petition disposed of; liberty granted to make appropriate application via MeeSeva/A.P.Online complying with statutory rules.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE M.SATYANARAYANA MURTHY
WRIT PETITION NO.22743 OF 2021
ORDER :
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 inaction on the part of the respondents No.4 in considering the representation, dated 02.01.2019 wherein the petitioner have requested to mutate her name in the web land for the land in an extent of Ac.5.00 Cents in Sy.No. 700/8 of Mamillapalli Village fields, C.K. Dinne Mandal, Kadapa District as she is unable to file the application through MeeSeva as her land is not sub-divided as arbitrary, illegal and violative of the fundamental and Constitutional rights guaranteed to the petitioner under Articles 14, 19, 21 and 300-A of the Constitution of India and consequently direct the respondent No.4 to subdivide the land and also to mutate my name in online/webland for the land in an extent of Ac.5.00 Cents in Sy.No. 700/8 of Mamillapalli Village fields, C.K. Dinne Mandal, Kadapa District and pass such other order…”
2
the land. But the office of Mee-Seva refused to receive the same, on the ground that the land of the petitioner is not sub-divided and hence online entries cannot be done. Thereupon the petitioner submitted a representation dated 02.01.2019 to the 4th respondent, requesting him to sub divide the land and mutate the name of the petitioner in webland records. Though the 4th respondent received the representation for mutation of the name of the petitioner in online records, but the 4th respondent did not process the same, which is highly illegal and arbitrary. Hence this Writ Petition.
3
of G.O.Ms. No.209 dated 14.06.2017 and Rule 5(3) of rules made under the Act. Consequently, I find no merit in the contention of this petitioner and dispose of the Writ Petition.
As a sequel miscellaneous application, pending, if any, shall also stand closed.
__________________________________________ JUSTICE M. SATYANARAYANA MURTHY
Date: 07.10.2021 KK
4
THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE M.SATYANARAYANA MURTHY
WRIT PETITION NO.22743 OF 2021
Date: 07.10.2021
KK
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the inaction of the Revenue authorities in mutating the petitioner's name in webland records constitutes illegal and arbitrary failure to act without mandatory application under G.O.Ms.209 and
Whether the petitioner is entitled to an order mandating subdivision of land and mutation of name on the failure to apply through MeeSeva.
Petitioner (Widow/V. L. N. Murthy's Wife)
1st Respondent
2nd Respondent
3rd Respondent
4th Respondent (Revenue Authority)
M. SATYANARAYANA MURTHY
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
