Dismissed

Lakkireddy Seetarama Lakshmamma v. The state of Andhra Pradesh

Andhra Pradesh HC6 May 2024WP/10352/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a writ petition challenging revenue authorities for non-consideration of a mutation request, the court directed the respondents to accept a fresh online application under Rule 18 instead of acting on a mere representation. No order passed on costs.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner directed to file a fresh online application under Rule 18 of RP Rules, 1989; respondents directed to consider it and pass reasoned orders expeditiously.

Lakkireddy Seetarama Lakshmamma Vs The state of… — Land Acquisition | Andhra Pradesh HC (2024)

¶1

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

¶2

TUESDAY, THE SEVENTH DAY OF MAY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FOUR

¶3

PRESENT

¶4

THE HON’BLE DR JUSTICE K. MANMADHA RAO

¶5

WRIT PETITION NO: 10352 OF 2023

¶6

Between;

¶7

Lakkireddy Seetarama Lakshmamma, W/o. Srinivasa Reddy, Hindu, Aged about 55 years. House wife, R/o.Nallapadu Village, Guntur Rural Mandal Guntur District.

¶8

...PETITIONER

¶9

AND

¶10

The state of Andhra Pradesh, Rep. by its Principal Secretary, Revenue Department, Secretariat, Velagapudi, Amaravathi, Guntur District.

¶11

The District Collector, Palnadu District at Amaravathi.

¶12

The Revenue Divisional Officer, Palnadu District.

¶13

The Tahsildar, Amaravathi Mandal, Palnadu District.

¶14

Guda Deepthi, D/o. Late Gangi Reddy, Hindu, Aged About 32 Years cultivation, R/o. Munagodu Village, Amaravathi Mandal, Palnadu District, Sattenapalli DMC.

¶15

...RESPONDENTS

¶16

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 pleased to issue an appropriate Writ, Order or Direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus, declaring the action of 2 to 4 in not considering the petitioner representation dated 24-03-2023 submitted under registered post pertaining to do mutation in respective of the schedule succeed by the petitioner in O.S.No- 204/2015 on the file of Senior Civil Court Sattenapalli of an extent of Ac. 1.50 Cents in D.No.227/C of Munagodu Village, Amaravathi Mandal, Palnadu District, as illegal.

¶17

arbitrary, violation of Articles 14, 21 and 300-A of^{theConstitutionofIndia} and consequently direct the respondents 2 to 4 to consider the representation of the petitioner to mutate' the petitioner name in all revenue records concerned within a time bound program.

¶18

lA NO: 1 OF 2023

¶19

Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the^{circumstances} stated in the affidavit filed in support of the writ petition, the High Court may be pleased to direct the respondents 2 to 4 to consider the petitioner's representation dated 24-03-2023 submitted under registered post to mutate the petitioner name in all revenue records pertaining to the schedule of an extent of Ac. 1.50 Cents in D.No.227/C of Munagodu Village, Amaravathi Mandal, Palnadu District, pending disposal of the Writ Petition.

¶20

Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI SESHAGIRI RAO ULLAM

¶21

Counsel for the Respondent Nos.1 to 4: GP FOR REVENUE

¶22

Counsel for the Respondent No.5: SRI HABIBULLA SHAIK

¶23

The Court made the following: ORDER

¶24

APHC010196752023

¶25

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI

¶26

[3310]

¶27

(Special Original Jurisdiction)

¶28

TUESDAY ,THE SEVENTH DAY OF MAY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FOUR

¶29

PRESENT

¶30

THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE K MANMADHA RAO

¶31

WRIT PETITION NO: 10352/2023

¶32

Between;

¶33

Lakkireddy Seetarama Lakshmamma

¶34

...PETITIONER

¶35

AND

¶36

The State Of Andhra Pradesh and Others ...RESPONDENT(S)

¶37

Counsel for the Petitioner:

¶38

1.SESHAGIRI RAO ULLAM

¶39

Counsel for the Respondent(S):

¶40

1.GP FOR REVENUE

¶41

2.HABIBULLASHAIK

¶42

The Court made the following Order;

¶43

This Writ Petition is filed, under Article 226 of the^{Constitutionof}

¶44

India, seeking the following relief;

¶45

..to issue an appropriate Writ, Order or Direction^{moreparticularly} one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the^{actionof2to4innot} considering the petitioner representation dated 24-03-2023^{submittedunder} registered post pertaining to do mutation in respective of the schedule succeed by the petitioner in O.S.No.204/2015 on the^{fileofSeniorCivilCourt,} Sattenapalli of an extent of Ac.1.50 Cents in D.N0.227/C^{ofMunagoduVillage,} Amaravathi Mandal, Palnadu District as illegal, arbitrary,^{violationofArticles} 14, 21 and 300-A of the Constitution of India and consequently^directthe respondents 2 to 4 to consider the representation of^{thepetitionertomutate} the petitioner name in all revenue records concerned within a time bound program...."

¶46

Government 2. None appeared for the petitioner. Heard iearned Assistant Pleader for Revenue appearing for the respondents.

¶47

the revenue authorities are 3 This writ petition is filed by the petitioner as dated 24.03.2023 submitted under not considering the representation in the revenue records as the registered post pertaining to mutate her name owner of the property situated in an extent of Ac.1.50 cents in D.No.227/C of Munagodu Village of Amaravathi Mandal.

¶48

Government Pleader for Revenue submits that there 4. Learned Assistant to mutate her name in revenue records is no application filed by the petitioner further submits that any person seeking pertaining to subject property. He in Record of Rights, has to submit an application through mutation of name in 18 of Andhra Pradesh Rights in Land and online under Form Vl-A as per Rule is filed, the respondent Pattadar Pass Books Rules, 1989, If such application authorities will consider and pass appropriate orders.

¶49

made by learned Assistant Government 5. In view of the submissions ina into other aspects, this writ petition is disposed of Pleader, without going fresh online application under Form Vl-A giving liberty to the petitioner to file a of Andhra Pradesh Rights in Land and Pattadar as mandated under Rule 18 is advised. On filing such application, the 4*^ Pass Books Rules, 1989, if she is

¶50

and pass appropriate reasoned respondent is directed to consider the same

¶51

orders, as expeditiously as possible, strictly In accordance with law

¶52

There shall be no order as to costs,

¶53

miscellaneous applications pending, if any, shall stand As a sequel

¶54

closed.

¶55

SDI- SHAIK MOHD. RAFI ASSISTANT REGISTRAR

//TRUE COPY//

SECTION OFFICER

To,

The Principal Secretary, Revenue Department, State of Andhra Pradesh, Secretariat, Velagapudi, Amaravathi, Guntur^District.

¶61

The District Collector, Palnadu District at Amaravathi.

¶62

The Revenue Divisional Officer, Palnadu District.

¶63

The Tahsildar, Amaravathi Mandal, Palnadu District.

¶64

One CC to SRI SESHAGIRI RAO ULLAM, Advocate [OPUC]

¶65

Two CCs to GP FOR REVENUE, High Court of Andhra^{Pradesh. [OUT]}

¶66

One CC to SRI HABIBULLASHAIK, Advocate (OPUC)

¶67

Three C.D. Copies.

Cnr(MBT)

HIGH COURT

DATED:07/05/2024

ORDER %

WP.No.10352of2023

DISPOSING OF THE W.P. WITHOUT COSTS

Lakkireddy Seetarama Lakshmamma v. The state of Andhra Pradesh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Lakkireddy Seetarama Lakshmamma 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

Karri Sudhakara Reddy Vs the State of Andhra Pradesh

Yeluru Ranga Reddy Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh

Medarametla Jakkaraiah Vs The Station House Officer Jaggaiahpet police station

Banoji Rao and 2 Others Vs State of A.P. Home Dept and 2 Other

Pedada Srirama Murthy Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh

Pasupuleti Gangadevi Vs the State of Andhra Pradesh