Vedulla Suresh Kumar Vs the State of Andhra Pradesh

¶1

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

¶2

TUESDAY, THE EIGHTEENTH DAY OF FEBRUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE

¶3

PRESENT

¶4

THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE K MANMADHA RAO WRIT PETITION NO: 2132 OF 2025

¶5

Between:

¶6

Vedulla Suresh Kumar, S/o. V. Suryanarayana, Aged about 44 years, R/o. D.No. 14-3-20, Sripalli Vari Veedhi, Samalkota, East Godavari District, Andhra Pradesh.

¶7

...PETITIONER

¶8

AND

¶9

The State of Andhra Pradesh, Rep. by the Principal Secretary, Revenue (Endowments) Department, Velgapudi, Amaravathi, Guntur District.

¶10

The Commissioner, Endowments Department, Gollapudi, Vijayawada, NTR District.

¶11

The Joint Commissioner, Endowments Department, Gollapudi, Vijayawada, NTR District.

¶12

The District Collector, (Endowments Department) Parvathipuram Manyam District.

¶13

The Deputy Collector, Land Protection Cell, Endowments Department, Kakinada.

¶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 pleased to pass an order or orders or a direction in the nature of a WRIT OF MANDAMUS declaring inaction of Respondents 2 and 4 in de-notifying the petitioner's property situated in Sy. No. 99/1, admeasuring Ac. 3.36 cents and Sy. No. 99/2, admeasuring Ac. 0.84 cents, totaling

¶16

/

¶17

Ac. 4.20 cents situated in Kharasavalasa Village, Salur Mandal, Vizianagaram District, presently in Parvathipuram Manyam^{Districtfromthe} prohibited property list under Section 22-A(1)(c) of the Registration Act, 1908 pursuant to proceedings Rc. No. A1/1029/2023 dated 04.11.2023 and Rc. No. A2/ENDDCO-VZM/3/2022-SA(SA1)-DCEDVSP dated 22.11.2023 recommending for the deletion as wholly arbitrary, unjust, contrary to the provisions of the Registration Act, 1908 besides being violative of the Articles 14 and 300A of the Constitution of India. lA NO: 1 OF 2025 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 2 to 5 Respondents to act on the proceedings Rc. No. A1/1029/2023 dated 04.11.2023 and Rc. No. A2/ENDDCOVZM/3/2022-SA(SA1 )-DCEDVSP dated 22.11.2023 and take appropriate steps for the petitioner’s property situated in Sy. No. 99/1, admeasuring Ac. 3.36 cents and Sy. No. 99/2, admeasuring Ac. 0.84 cents, totaling Ac. 4.20 cents situated in Kharasavalasa Village Salur Mandal Vizianagaram District, presently in Parvathipuram Manyam^{Districtfromthe} prohibited property list from the prohibited property list under Section 22-A(1)(c) of the Registration Act, 1908.

¶18

Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI S.V.S.S.SIVA RAM REPRESENTING

¶19

M/s.CKR ASSOCIATES

¶20

Counsel for the Respondents: GP FOR ENDOWMENTS

¶21

The Court made the following: ORDER

¶22

APHC010037932025

¶23

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

¶24

[3310]

¶25

TUESDAY ,THE EIGHTEENTH DAY OF FEBRUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE

¶26

PRESENT

¶27

THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE K MANMADHA RAO

¶28

WRIT PETITION NO: 2132/2025

Between;

Vedulla Suresh Kumar

...PETITIONER

AND

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

¶34

Counsel for the Petitioner:

¶35

1.CKR ASSOCIATES

¶36

Counsel for the Respondent(S):

¶37

1.GP FOR ENDOWMENTS

¶38

The Court made the following:

¶39

ORDER:-

¶40

This petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution^{ofIndiaforthe}

¶41

following relief;-

¶42

. .pleased to issue an order or orders or a direction^inthe nature of a WRIT OF MANDAMUS declaring inaction of Respondent Nos.2 and 4 in denotifying the petitioner’s property situated in Sy.No.99/1, admeasuring Ac.2.36^cents and Sy.No.99/2, admeasuring Ac.0.84 cents totalling Ac.4.20 cents situated in Kharasavalasa Village, Salur Mandal, Vizianagaram District presently in Parvathipuram Manyam District from the prohibited property list under Section 22-A(1)(c) of the Registration Act, 1908 pursuant^to proceedings Rc.No.A1/1029/2023, dated 04.11.2023 and Rc. No.A2/ENDDCO-VZM/3/2022-SA(SA 1)-DCEDVSP,

¶43

2

¶44

V.

¶45

dated 22.11.2023 recommending for the deletion as wholly arbitrary, unjust, contrary to the provisions of the Registration Act, 1908 besides being violative of the^Articles 14 and 300-A of the Constitution of India and pass....”

¶46

The case of the petitioner in brief is that the petitioner^and his father jointly purchased the subject property totaling Ac.4.20 cents in Kharasavalasa Village, Salur Mandal through two registered^{saledeedsinthe} year 2006. Since the purchase, they have been in peaceful possession. cultivating the land with paddy crops. After the demise of his father in 2017, the petitioner became the sole legal heir and continued to exercise ownership rights. However in 2021, when he attempted to sell a portion of the property he discovered that it was listed under the prohibited property list. Thereafter, the petitioner had issued legal notices to the concerned authorities, leading to an inquiry. Reports were received from the Executive Officer of Group Temples, Salur, and the District Endowments Officer confirming that the subject land does not belong to any temple clarifying that only Sy.No.98 is associated with Sri Seetharama Swamy Vari Temple. The authorities recommended removing Sy.Nos.99/1 and 99/2 from the prohibited property list. Subsequently, the Sub-Collector directed the Tahsildar to take appropriate action and the Deputy Commissioner of the Endowments Department also recommended issuing a No Objection Certificate (NOC) for the property’s registration. Despite multiple official recommendations,^no final action was taken to remove the property from the prohibited list. While so, respondent No.3 issued a memo dated 21.02.2024, directing the respondent No.5 to conduct an inspection and submit a report to facilitate the removal process.

¶47

3

¶48

However, respondent No.5 failed to do so. Aggrieved by the same, the presentwrit petition is filed.

¶49

Heard Mr. S.V.S.S.Siva Ram, learned counsel, representing M/s.CKR ASSOCIATES, learned counsel for the petitioner^{andthelearned} Government Pleader for Endowments appearing for the respondents.

¶50

\

¶51

On hearing, learned counsel for the petitioner submits^thatthe respondent Nos.3 to 5 are not acting on the proceedings vide Rc.No.A1/1029/2023, dated 04.11.2023 and proceedings vide Rc.No.A2/ENDDCO-VZM/3/2022-SA(SA1)-DCEDVSP, dated 22.11.2023 for deleting the petitioner’s property from the prohibitory list situated in Sy.No.99/1, admeasuring Ac.3.36 cents and Sy.No.99/2, admeasuring Ac.0.84 cents, totalling Ac.4.20 cents situated in Kharasavalasa Village, Salur Mandal, Vizianagaram District, presently in Parvathipuram Manyam District (hereinafter referred to as the “Subject Property”) under Section 22-A(1)(c) of the Registration Act, 1908. Hence, the learned counsel for the petitioner requests to pass appropriate orders.

¶52

Whereas, learned Government Pleader for Endowments submits that the respondents will pass appropriate orders by following due process of law.

¶53

Considering the submissions of learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Government Pleader for Endowments, the respondent No.2 is directed to conduct inspection and after receipt of the inspection report, to

¶54

4

¶55

take action on the proceedings vide Rc.No.A1/1029/2023,^{dated04.11.2023} and proceedings vide Rc.No.A2/ENDDCO-VZM/3/2022-SA(SA1)-DCEDVSP, dated 22.11.2023 and pass appropriate orders in accordance^{withlawwithina} period of three (03) months from the date of receipt of copy of this order.

¶56