Mala Eranna Vs the State of Andhra Pradesh

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, particularly a writ of mandamus, directing the respondents, especially the 2"^^ respondent- District Collector, Kurnool District to consider and dispose of the petitioners representation dated 18.04.2025 in the light of the Tahsildars recommendation vide RCB No. 1426/2023 dated 01.06.2023, and mutate the petitioners name^intherevenue records for Survey No. 219 to an extent of 0.15 cents, Gudikal Village, Yemmiganur Mandal, within a stipulated time.

¶18

lA NO: 1 OF 7()9R

¶19

Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed i in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased^to direct the respondents not to alienate the subject land in favour of any one and maintain status quo, pending disposal of the writ petition. Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI V. R. MAHESWARA RAO PALETI Counsel for the Respondent Nos.1 to 4: GP FOR REVENUE The Court made the following order:

¶20

•• •• XI •• •«

¶21

APHC010247952025

¶22

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

¶23

[3329]

¶24

THURSDAY,THE TWENTY SIXTH DAY OF JUNE TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE

¶25

PRESENT

¶26

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE VENKATESWARLU NIMMAGADDA

¶27

WRIT PETITION NO: 15512/2025

¶28

Between:

¶29

1,MALA ERANNA, S/0 ANUMANNA, AGED ABOUT 54 YEARS, RESIDENT OF D.NO. 6-39-1, GUDIKAL VILLAGE YEMMIGANUR MANDAL, KURNOOL DISTRICT, ANDHRA PRADESH.

¶30

...PETITIONER

¶31

AND

¶32

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

¶33

2.THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, KURNOOL DISTRICT, KURNOOL, ANDHRA PRADESH.

¶34

3.THE SUBCOLLECTOR, ADONI KURNOOL DISTRICT, ANDHRA PRADESH.

¶35

4.THE TAHSILDAR, YEMMIGANUR MANDAL, KURNOOL DISTRICT, ANDHRA PRADESH.

¶36

...RESPONDENT(S):

¶37

This Court made the following ORDER:-

¶38

This writ petition is filed under Article 226 of the^Constitution

¶39

of India seeking the following relief:

¶40

To Issue a writ, order, or direction, particularly a writ of mandamus, directing the respondents, especially the 2nd respondent District Collector, Kurnool District to consider and dispose of the petitioner representation dated 18.04.2025 in the light of the Tahsildars

¶41

2

¶42

recommendation vide RGB No. ^ 42612023 dated 01.06.2023, and mutate the petitioners name in the revenue records for Survey No. 219 to an extent of 0.15 cents, Gudikal Village, Yemmiganur Mandal, within a stipulated time and Pass such

¶43

Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and the^learned Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue appearing for the respondents.

¶44

The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is the absolute owner and possessor of agricultural landed property admeasuring to an extent of Ac.0.15 cents in Sy.No.219, situated at Gudikal Village, Yemmiganur Mandal, Kurnool District, having inherited it from his ancestors. The petitioner issued a Pattadar Passbook and Title Deeds bearing Patta No.551, dated 20.12.2008 and his name was duly^mutatedin the revenue records. Since then, he has been in continuous possession and enjoyment of the said land. While so, the petitioner came to know that his name had been illegally removed^fromthe revenue records, and the land was reclassified as Migulubhoomi., without issuing any prior notice. Even though the land^wassub divided, for reasons best known to the authorities, it was recorded

¶45

3

¶46

as Khata No.5581 and treated as surplus land. The petitioner immediately approached the respondent, i.e., the Tahsildar, by submitting several written representations requesting for rectification of the revenue records and restoration of his rightful title against original extent of land. Pursuant to the representation^ofthe petitioner, the 4**^ respondent herein conducted an enquiry and submitted a report dated 01.06.2023 to the District Collector, i.e., the 2'^^ respondent herein, recommending mutation of^the entire land, including Khata No.5581, in favour of the petitioner,^whohad acquired the land from his ancestors. However, despite receiving the detailed report submitted by the 4‘^ respondent, the 2 nd respondent neither considered nor implemented nor did pass any orders or reject the petitioner’s claim. Hence the present writ petition.

¶47

Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue appearing for the respondents furnished written instructions dated 25.06.2025 issued by the 4^^ respondent.

¶48

“The Village Surveyor, Gudikal Village has reported that, dispute raised between the writ petitioner and Sri.Gudikanti Krishnaiah for

¶49

i

¶50

4

¶51

cultivating the land in Sy.No.219 to an extent of 0.15 cents of Gudikal village.

¶52

Finally the Village Revenue Officer, Gudikal village has concluded that, the writ petitioner has got the subject land through hereditary from his grandfather (i.e., RH Pattadar Sanjappagari Anumadu) and the writ petitioner's opponent got the land in Sy.No.219 to an extent of 0.15 Cents from his grandfather Neelappa (i.e., RH Pattadar) and he sold out the same land to Mala Chinna Ranganna. There is a civil dispute occurred between the writ petitioner and his opponent Sri.Gudikanti Krishnaiah for the subject land. Due to that it is not possible^to mutate the subject land to the writ petitioner or writ petitioner's opponent. And Sri.Gudikanti Krishnaiah has filed a caveat petition in Hon'ble Junior Civil Judge Court, Yemmiganur vide CAVEAT PETITION NO. 149/2024 for the subject land. There is a caveat petition is pending in Hon'ble Junior Civil Judge Court, Yemmiganur”.

¶53

The learned Assistant Government Pleader further submits that since the petitioner has submitted the representation,^the2 nd respondent will consider the representation dated 18.04.2025^and pass appropriate orders in accordance with law.

¶54

Having regard to the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue appearing for the respondents and on perusal

¶55

5

¶56

of the material available on record, this court is of the considered view that the present writ petition can be disposed of by directing the 2^^ respondent to consider the representation submitted by the petitioner dated 18.04.2025 with reference to the report^submitted by the 4*^ respondent dated 01.06.2023 and pass an appropriate orders in accordance with law after providing an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner and other stake holders if any more particularly Sri.Gudikanti Krishnaiah, within a period of four (04) months from the date of receipt of the copy of this^order. In the meanwhile, status-quo obtaining as on today shall be maintained by both the parties in respect of the subject propery.

¶57