Disposed

N. Adinarayan Reddy, v. The State of Andhra Pradesh

Andhra Pradesh HC14 Feb 2023WP/3504/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Bench disposed of a writ petition challenging a Tahsildar's endorsement made regarding pending civil litigation over the petitioner's land. The Court refused to interfere with the revenue authority's cautious approach given the civil proceedings.

What did the court decide?

Writ petition disposed of without costs; petitioner directed to approach Civil Court for appropriate orders regarding the subject matter.

N. Adinarayan Reddy, Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh — Property and Title | Andhra Pradesh HC (2023)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH :: AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction)

¶2

TUESDAY, THE FOURTEENTH DAY OF FEBRUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY THREE

¶3

PRESENT

¶4

I
A
i

¶5

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE B KRISHNA MOHAN

¶6

WRIT PETITION NO: 3504 OF 2023

Between:

...PETITIONER

AND

1. Andhra Pradesh, Rep. by its Principal Secretarym,Revenue

¶11

Department, Secretariat, Velagapudi, Amaravati, Guntur District.

¶12

The District Collector, Anantapuramu, Anantapuramu District.

¶13

The Tahsildar, Anantapuramu, Anantapuramu District. 4. AnantapuramuThe Station HouseDistrict.Officer, IV town Police Station,’ Anantapuramu,

¶14

...RESPONDENTS

¶15

Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be direction more particularly one in the nature of WRIT OF MANDAMUS declaring the action or respondents, more particularly the endorsement vide 342/2022 dated 19.12.2022 passed by the respondent No. 3 4no of the petitioner to his property in Plot bearing No. 107 108 an extent of Ac.0.0568 Cents, covered by Survey Nos. 100-6 of papampet revenue village, Anantapuramu Mandal, Anantapuramu district as illegal, irregular, irrational, without any authority or sanction of law and voilative of principals of natural justice, and orders of this Hon'ble court in WP No. 37033 of 222 dated 22.11.2022 and Articles 14, 21 and 300-A of the Constitution of India and consequently direct the respondents 2 to 5 not to interfere in any manner with petitioner possession and enjoyment over said property in any manner.

¶16

lA NO: 1 OF 2023

¶17

Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to stay of operation of endorsement vide 342/2022 dated 19.12.2022 passed by the . respondent No.3 and direct the respondents No. 2 to 4 not to interfere in to peaceful possession and enjoyment of petitioner property bearing Plot No. 107, 108 an extent of Ac.0.0568 Cents, covered by Survey Nos. 100/6 of papampet revenue village, Anantapuramu Mandal and district pending disposal of the main Writ Petition.

¶18

Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI. E ANJANA REDDY

¶19

Counsel for the Respondents 1 to 3 : GP FOR REVENUE

¶20

Counsel for the Respondent No.4 : GP FOR HOME

¶21

The Court made the following: ORDER

¶22

¶23

. IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH:: AMARAVATI

¶24

THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE B KRISHNA MOHAN

¶25

WRIT PETITION No.3504 of 2023

¶26

» N. Adinarayan Reddy, S/o. • N. * Narayana Reddy, aged about 63 years, R/o.D.No.l 1-1-468, Aravinda Nagar, Anantapuramu Town, Anantapuramu District.

¶27

Petitioner

¶28

Versus

¶29

The State of Andhra Pradesh, rep. by its Principal Secretary, Revenue Department, Secretariat, Velagapudi, Amaravathi, Guntur District and 4 . others.

....Respondents

ORDER:

Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the

¶34

t learned Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue for the

¶35

respondent Nos.l to 3. 2. The grievance of tlie writ petitioner is that the complaint is made by the 5* respondent and the 3^'^ and 4th respondents are interfering with the petitioner’s peaceful possession and enjoyment of the property in plot No. 107, 108 to an extent of Acers 0.0568 cents in Survey No. 100-6 of Papampet Revenue Village, Anantapuramu Mandal, Anantapuramu District,

¶36

r • 3. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is a bona fide purchaser to an extent of Acers

0.0568 cents bearing plot No. 107, 108 in Survey No. 100-6 of Papampet Revenue Village, Anantapuramu Mandal, Anantapuramu District. Admittedly, the petitioner filed E.A.No.90 of 2018 in E.P.No.40 of 2011 in O.S.No.76 of 2001 which is on the file of Principal Senior Civil Judge, Anantapuramu, in which the 5‘h respondent is also a party to the proceedings with respect to the subject property bearing i Plot No. 107, 108 an extent of Acers 0.0568 cents in Survey No. 100-6 of Papampet Revenue Village, Anantapuramu

¶41

¶42

Mandal, Anantapuramu District. 4. The case of the petitioner is that he purchased the property through a registered sale deed dated 12.05.1999 vide Document No.3872/1999. While so, the 5th respondent gave a complaint to the 2"^ respondent, which was forwarded to the 3«i and 4th respondents to take appropriate action. The respondent issued the impugned endorsement dated ‘ 19.42.2022 stating that as per the sale deed and the adangal, it is not in Survey No. 100-6 to an extent of Acers 0.0568 cents as patta land and in the column of occupant it is ' mentioned as “unknown.” He further observed that, the civil cases are pending with respect to the subject land in E.P.No.40 of 2011 in O.S.No.76 of 2001 on the file of Principal Senior Civil Judge, Anantapuramu and noticed

»7

further that there are other civil disputes between the

¶47

’ petitioner and the other persons viz., G.Narasimhulu,

¶48

» K.Nagamani and K.Hanumanthappa. 5. In view of the same, subject to outcoine of the civil suits/civil cases.before the respective Courts, the subsequent action would be taken by the Tahsildar. Till such time,

¶49

the petitioner and the 5**^ respondent are advised not to enter

¶50

into the vacant land/the subject land in order to avoid law

¶51

■ and order disturbances and breach of public tranquillity. Thus the 4*** respondent herein is instructed to take neceasary action to avoid breach of law and order problem at

¶52

) the si(e. Aggrieved by the same this writ petition is filed. 6. On the other hand, the learned Assistant Government Pleader appearing for the respondents submits that as the Civil cases are pending between the petitioner and the 5^^ respondent with respect to the subject property, the respondent has rightly observed by way of the endorsement dated 19.12.2022. 7. In view of the above said facts and circumstances. as the impugned endorsement dated 19.12.2022 discloses

¶53

’ that subject to outcome of the civil cases pending before the above said Civil Courts the respondent No.4 will take further

¶54

¶55

¶56

action with respect to the entries of the revenue records,

¶57

- ..J.

¶58

¶59

this Court will not interfere at this stage. However, it is made

¶60

(

¶61

clear that the petitioner is at liberty to approach the Civil Court even in the pending cases to take appropriate orders as per law by giving notices to the parties to the dispute including the 5*^ respondent herein. The respective Courts will pass appropriate orders on merits on such applications of the petitioner.

¶62

9. Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of. There shall >

¶63

be no order as to costs.

¶64

As a sequel. Miscellaneous Petitions pending, if any.

¶65

shall stand closed.

¶66

Sd/- M.S.V.NAVEEN CHANDRA DEPUTY registrar //TRUE COPY// SECTION OFFICER

¶67

¶68

To, 1. The Principal Secretary, Revenue Department, State of Andhra Pradesh, Secretariat, Velagapudi, Amaravati, Guntur District. 2. The District Collector, Anantapuramu, Anantapuramu District. 3. The Tahsildar, Anantapuramu, Anantapuramu District. 4. The Station House Officer, IV town Police Station, Anantapuramu, Anantapuramu District. 5. Dr. Momin Shaik Ahammad, S/o. Momin Abdul Subban Sab, Aged about 70 years,R/o. D.No.32-67/12-1, Balaji Colony, Ramakrishnapuramu, Secundrabad, Telangana State 6. One CC to SRI. E ANJANA REDDY Advocate [OPUC] 7. Two CCs to GP FOR REVENUE, High Court of Andhra Pradesh. [OUT] 8. Two CCs to GP FOR HOME, High Court of Andhra Pradesh. [OUT] 9. Two CD Copies MSR Sdkr

¶69

HIGH COURT

¶70

DATED:14/02/2023

¶71

g 2 2 21 AUG 2023 S
★ Current Section

¶72

ORDER

¶73

WP.No.3504 of 2023 |3

¶74

■ KkM

¶75

DISPOSING OF WP WITHOUT COSTS

N. Adinarayan Reddy, v. The State of Andhra Pradesh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

N. Adinarayan Reddy, v. The State of Andhra Pradesh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Ch Ramakrishna Prasad Vs State of Andhra Pradesh

Kosuru Radhamma Vs the State of Andhra Pradesh

M Siva Sankaraiah Vs the State of Ap

Rajulapati Venkata Raja Ramesh. Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh

P.Govinda Rao, Vs The District Collector

Sri. Uppalapati Subbarao, Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh