Dismissed¶33

Apathi Shyamala Devi, v. State of Andhra Pradesh

Andhra Pradesh HC7 Sept 2025WP/10909/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Apathi Shyamala Devi v. State of Andhra Pradesh; Writ Petition No. 10909 of 2024; High Court of Andhra Pradesh at Amaravati; Justice Tarlada Rajasekhar Rao; dismissed as withdrawn on 08.09.2025; Tahsildar Banaganapalli blocked online revenue records by removing digital signature; Ac. 1.50 cents in Sy. No. 305, Palukuru Village placed in dispute register; Andhra Pradesh Rights in Land and Pattadar Pass Books Act, 1971; Rule 9(1)(c)(ii) of the 1989 Rules; Articles 226, 14, 19 and 21; IA No. 1 of 2024 under Section 151 CPC; no order as to costs; miscellaneous petitions closed; merits not decided.

What did the court decide?

Permission to withdraw the writ petition; no order as to costs. ¶33

Apathi Shyamala Devi, Vs State of Andhra… — Writ and Judicial Review | Andhra Pradesh HC (2025)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Permission to withdraw the writ petition; no order as to costs.

¶33

Issue for consideration

Whether the action of the Tahsildar, Banaganapalli in blocking the online revenue records by removing the digital signature in respect of Ac. 1.50 cents in Sy. No. 305 of Palukuru Village and placing the land in the dispute register is arbitrary, illegal and contrary to the Andhra Pradesh Rights in Land and Pattadar Pass Books Act, 1971 and Rule 9(1)(c)(ii) of the 1989 Rules, warranting deletion from the dispute register and restoration of the digital signature.

¶18

Ratio / Principle

Permission is accorded to learned counsel for the petitioner to withdraw the writ petition, the endorsement having been made on the bundle.

¶32

Key takeaways

The Writ Petition is dismissed as withdrawn.ratio¶33
There shall be no order as to costs.ratio¶34
As a sequel, miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shall stand closed.ratio¶35

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Writ Petition No. 10909 of 2024, High Court of Andhra Pradesh at Amaravati (Special Original Jurisdiction) - Apathi Shyamala Devi v. State of Andhra Pradesh and others - decided 08.09.2025 by Justice Tarlada Rajasekhar Rao. The petitioner, owner of Ac. 1.50 cents in Sy. No. 305 of Palukuru Village, Banaganapalli Mandal, Nandyala District, sought a writ of mandamus under Article 226 declaring the 4th respondent Tahsildar's action in blocking the online revenue records by removing the digital signature and placing the land in the dispute register as arbitrary and illegal, contrary to the Andhra Pradesh Rights in Land and Pattadar Pass Books Act, 1971 and Rule 9(1)(c)(ii) of the Rights in Land and Pattadar Pass Books Rules, 1989, and violative of Articles 14, 19 and 21, with a consequential direction to delete the land from the dispute register and restore the digital signature; IA No. 1 of 2024 under Section 151 CPC sought interim deletion from the dispute register. Learned counsel for the petitioner sought leave to withdraw and endorsed the request on the bundle; permission was accorded and the writ petition was dismissed as withdrawn, with no order as to costs, and miscellaneous petitions, if any, stood closed. The merits were not adjudicated.

¶1

APHC010215382024

¶2

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

¶3

[3330]

¶4

MONDAY, THE EIGHTH DAY OF SEPTEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE

¶5

PRESENT

¶6

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE TARLADA RAJASEKHAR RAO

¶7

WRIT PETITION NO: 10909/2024

¶8

Between:

¶9

APATHI SHYAMALA DEVI,, W/O. A. GOVIND CHOWDHARY, AGED ABOUT 59 YEARS, R/O. 135-5, NGOS COLONY, BETHAMCHERLA VILLAGE AND MANDAL, NANDYALA DISTRICT, ANDHRA PRADESH.

¶10

...PETITIONER

¶11

AND

¶12

STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY TO REVENUE DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT, VELAGAPUDI, GUNTUR DISTRICT, ANDHRA PRADESH.

¶13

THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, NANDYALA, NANDYALA DISTRICT ANDHRA PRADESH.

¶14

THE REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER, DHONE, NANDYALA DISTRICT, ANDHRA PRADESH.

¶15

THE TAHSILDAR, BANAGANAPALLI MANDAL, NANDYALA DISTRICT, ANDHRA PRADESH.

¶16

THE VILLAGE REVENUE OFFICER, PALUKURU VILLAGE, BANAGANAPALLI MANDAL, NANDYALA DISTRICT, ANDHRA PRADESH

¶17

...RESPONDENT(S)

¶18

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 a writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of writ of mandamus declaring the actions of the 4th Respondent i.e. the Tahsildhar, Banaganapalli in blocking the Online Revenue Records by removing his / her digital signature in respect of the land having an extent of Ac. 1.50 cents in Sy. No. 305 of Palukuru Village, Banaganapalli Mandal, Nandyala District, belonging to the Petitioner and placing the same in the dispute register as arbitrary, illegal, contrary to the provisions of the Andhra Pradesh Rights in Land and Pattadar Pass Books Act, 1971 (1971 Act) and contrary to the Rule 9(1)(c)(ii) of the Rights in Land and Pattadar pass Books Rules, 1989, apart from being violative of articles 14, 19 and 21

¶19

¶20

of the Constitution of India and consequently direct the Respondents herein to delete the land having an extent of Ac. 1.50 cents in Sy. No. 305 of Palukuru Village, Banaganapalli Mandal, Nandyala District from the dispute register and restore the digital signature and pass

¶21

IA NO: 1 OF 2024

¶22

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 to delete the land having an extent of Ac. 1.50 cents in Sy. No. 305 of Palukuru Village, Banaganapalli Mandal, Nandyala District from the dispute register pending disposal of the Writ Petition in the interest of justice and pass

¶23

Counsel for the Petitioner:

¶24