Partly allowed

Madiga Pedda Pullamma v. The State of Andhra Pradesh

Andhra Pradesh HC22 Apr 2024WP/4284/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioner challenged inaction on a Spandana complaint regarding land mutation filing writ petition under Article 226 and Section 151 CPC, which was dismissed at admission stage as respondent filed endorsement.

What did the court decide?

Dispose of writ petition at stage of admission with liberty to challenge endorsement dated 25.10.2023 passed by respondent No.4.

Madiga Pedda Pullamma Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh — Property and Title | Andhra Pradesh HC (2024)

¶1

S*5g5»

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH:;AMARAVATI

¶3

(Special Original Jurisdiction)

¶4

TUESDAY, THE TWENTY THIRD DAY OF APRIL TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FOUR

¶5

PRESENT

¶6

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE SUBBA REDDY SATTI

¶7

WRIT PETITION NO: 4284 OF 2n?4

¶8

Between:

¶9

Madiga Pedda Pullamma, W/o Sanjanna (alias China Sanjanna) Aged about 85 years Resident of D. No. 3-48/D, R Lingamdinne Village Sanjamla Mandal, Kurnool District

¶10

...PETITIONER

¶11

AND

¶12

The State of Andhra Pradesh, Rep. by its Principal Secretary, Revenue Department, Amaravati.

¶13

The District Collector, Kurnool District

¶14

The Sub Collector cum Revenue Divisional Officer, Nandhyala

¶15

The Tahsildar, Sanjamala Mandal, Kurnool District.

¶16

...RESPONDENTS

¶17

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 actions of the

¶18

Respondents in not considering the complaint dated August 28, 2023 raised in Spandana and passing appropriate orders by mutating the name of the Petitioner in relation to land measuring 4.55 Acres in Revenue Survey No. 423/1 (423/A) situated at Giddaluru Village, Sanjamala Mandal, I Kurnool District as arbitrary, capricious and violative of Article 14, 19 and 300A of Constitution of India and consequently direct the Respondents to consider the complaint dated August 28, 2023 raised in Spandana and pass an appropriate orders by mutating the name of the Petitioner in relation to land measuring 4.55 Acres in Revenue Survey No. 423/ 1 (423/A) situated at Giddaluru Village, Sanjamala Mandal, Kurnool District.

¶19

lA NO: 1 OF 2024

¶20

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 direct the Respondents not to grant any pattadar pass book and title deed book to Bellam Simon based on the entries on Adangal Pahani for the year 2023 in relation to land measuring 4.55 Acres in Revenue Survey No. 423/1 (423/A) situated at Giddaluru Village, Sanjamala Mandal, Kurnool District and grant status quo on entries made in the Adangal Pahani for the year 2023.

¶21

Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI. R YELLA REDDY

¶22

Counsel for the Respondent No.1 & 4: GP FOR REVENUE

¶23

The Court made the following: ORDER

¶24

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH : AMARAVATI

¶25

THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE SUBBA REDDY SATTI

¶26

WRIT PETITION No.4284 OF 2024

¶27

Between:

¶28

Madiga Pedda Pullamma, W/o Sanjanna (alias China Sanjanna), Aged about 85 years, Resident of D.No.3-48/D, R Lingamdinne Village, Sanjamla Mandal, Kurnool District.

¶29

... Petitioner

¶30

And

¶31

The State of Andhra Pradesh, rep by its Principal Secretary, Revenue Department, Amaravati and three others.

¶32

... Respondents

¶33

Counsel for the petitioner : Sri R.Yella Reddy Counsel for respondents ; GP for Revenue

¶34

ORDER

¶35

The above writ petition is filed to declare the inaction^onthe part of respondent No.4 in considering the Spandana^complaint dated 28.08.2023 concerning mutation of the petitioner’s^name in respect of land of an extent of Ac.4.55 cents in R.S.No.423/1 (423/A), situated at Giddaluru Village, Sanjamala Mandal,^Kurnool District, as illegal and arbitrary.

¶36

Page 2 of 3

¶37

SRS, J W.P.No.4284 of 2024

¶38

Heard Sri R.Yella Reddy, learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue appearing for the respondents.

¶39

Learned Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue would produce the endorsement dated 25.10.2023 passed by respondent No.4 according to the Spandana complaint made by the petitioner. Copy of the same is handed over to the learned counsel for the petitioner.

¶40

Learned counsel for the petitioner seeks leave to challenge the endorsement dated 25.10.2023 passed by respondent^No.4. 5. Given the submission made by learned counsel for the petitioner, the Writ Petition is disposed of, at the stage of admission with the consent, giving liberty to the petitioner to challenge the endorsement dated 25.10.2023 passed by respondent No.4. There shall be no order as to costs.

¶41

As a sequel, pending miscellaneous petitions, if any, shall stand dismissed.

¶42

Sd/- M. SRINIVAS ASSISTANT REGISTRAR //TRUE COPY// / _ (A/

¶43

/Action officer

¶44

To,

¶45

The Principal Secretary, Revenue Department, State of Andhra Pradesh, Amaravati.

¶46

The District Collector, Kurnool District

¶47

The Sub Collector cum Revenue Divisional Officer, Nandhyala

¶48

The Tahsildar, Sanjamala Mandal, Kurnool District.

¶49

One CC to SRI R YELLA REDDY Advocate [OPUC]

¶50

Two CCs to GP FOR REVENUE, High Court of Andhra Pradesh [OUT]

¶51

Two C.D Copies

MBT

HIGH COURT

DATED;23/04/2024

ORDER

WP.No.4284 of 2024

DISPOSING THE W.P WITHOUT COSTS

Madiga Pedda Pullamma v. The State of Andhra Pradesh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Madiga Pedda Pullamma 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

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Petlu Durgalu, Vs The State Of Andhra Pradesh

Vallamsetty Venkataratnamma Vs the State of Andhra Pradesh

Vallum Somasekhar Reddy Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh

Allampalli Supriya Vs the State of Andhra Pradesh

Kusam Ramireddy, Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh

Rosily Tholath Vs the State of Andhra Pradesh