Disposed¶39

Seelam Santha Kumari v. The State of Andhra Pradesh

Andhra Pradesh HC5 Oct 2025WP/23394/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Andhra Pradesh High Court, Amaravati; W.P.No. 23394 OF 2025; Justice Tarlada Rajasekhar Rao; disposed at admission stage; writ of mandamus; pattadar pass book; title deed; digital signature lock on web portal; Webland; UAT Webland Adangal; resurvey published 18.01.2024; ROR entries; assigned land; family dispute; P.G.R.S. NND202501272569; enquiry by Tahsildar with notice to rival claimant; Article 226; Articles 14 and 21; Nandyal District; Atmakur Mandal; Nallakalva village; Sy.No.556/2A; Ac.2.00 cents; no costs.

What did the court decide?

Direction to respondent No.4 to conduct an enquiry and pass an appropriate order after issuing notices to both the writ petitioner and Sri P. Venkataiah and to communicate the decision to the parties; no order as to costs; pending interlocutory applications, if any, stand closed. ¶39

Seelam Santha Kumari Vs The State of Andhra… — Writ and Judicial Review | Andhra Pradesh HC (2025)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶39

Issue for consideration

Whether the Tahsildar, Atmakur Mandal, acted arbitrarily in locking the digital signature on the web portal and failing to issue the pattadar pass book and title deed to the petitioner for Sy.No.556/2A (Ac.2.00 cents), Nallakalva village, and whether a mandamus should issue directing updation of records and issuance of the documents. +1 more

¶27

Court's answer

Without going into the merits of the case, the Court disposed of the Writ Petition at the admission stage, directing respondent No.4 (Thasildar, Atmakur Mandal) to conduct an enquiry and pass an appropriate order after issuing notices to both the writ petitioner and Sri P. Venkataiah, and to communicate the decision to the parties.

¶38

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Writ Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India — Seelam Santha Kumari sought a mandamus declaring arbitrary the act of the Thasildar, Atmakur Mandal, Nandyal District in keeping the digital signature locked on the web portal and failing to issue pattadar pass book and title deed for Ac.2.00 cents in Sy.No.556/2A, Nallakalva village, alleging violation of Articles 14 and 21 — the Tahsildar had withheld mutation owing to a family dispute, Pustela Venkataiah objecting that the land was assigned to his grandfather Pustela Narasaiah, and communicating this through the P.G.R.S. vide NND202501272569 — Held: without going into the merits, the Court disposed of the petition at the admission stage, directing respondent No.4 to conduct an enquiry and pass an appropriate order after issuing notices to both the writ petitioner and Sri P. Venkataiah and to communicate the decision to the parties; no order as to costs; pending interlocutory applications closed.

¶1

APHC010445592025

¶2

[3330]

¶3

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

¶4

MOND A Y, THE SIXTH DAY OF OCTOBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE

¶5

PRESENT

¶6

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE TARLADA RAJASEKHAR RAO

¶7

WRIT PETITION No. 23394/2025

¶8

BETWEEN:

¶9

SEELAM SAN T HA KUMARI, W/o. S SWAMAN N A AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS, R/o. 5-378-1 KG ROAD, JUPADU BUNGALOW, K URNOOL, ANDHRA PRADESH 51 8 401

¶10

...PETITIONER

¶11

AND

¶12

THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, RE P BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, REVENUE DE P ARTMENT SECRETARIA T BLDGS, VELGAPUDI, AMARAVAT I GUNTUR DISTRICT.

¶13

THE DISTRI C T COLLECTOR, NANDYAL DISTRICT, NANDYAL.

¶14

THE REVENU E DIVISIONAL OFFICER, NANDYAL, NANDYAL DISTRICT

¶15

THE THASILD A R, ATMAKURMANDAL, NANDYAL D ISTRICT ...RESPONDENT(S):

¶16

Petition under A rticle 226 of the Constitution of India praying that in the circumstance s stated in the affidavit filed therewi t h, the High Court may be pleased to issue a writ, order or dir e ction more particularly one in th e nature of Writ of Mandamus, decla r ing the acts

¶17

¶18

on the part of the Thasildar, AtmakurMandal, Nandyal District in kept lock for the Digital Signature on the web portal and failed to issue pattadar pass book and title deed in the name of petitioner for the lands in Sy No. 556/2A for an extent of Ac. 2.00 cents situated at Nallakalva Village of AtmakurMandal, Nandyal District amounts to erroneous, arbitrary and violative of Articles 14 and 21 of the Constitution of India, besides being violative of principles of natural justice and consequently direct the Thasildar, Atmakur to issue pattdar pass book and title deed in the name of writ petitioner relating to lands in Sy No. 556/2A for an extent of Ac. 2.00 cents situated at Nallakalva Village of AtmakurMandal, Nandyal District in the interest of justice and to pass such other order or orders.

¶19

Counsel for the Petitioner:

¶20

1.T C KRISHNAN

¶21

Counsel for the Respondent(S):

¶22

1.GP FOR REVENUE

¶23

The Court made the following:

¶24

¶25

ORDER:

¶26

The present Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for the following relief/s:

¶27

…to issue a writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus, declaring the acts on the part of the Tahsildar, Atmakur Mandal, Nandyal District in kept lock for the Digital Signature on the web portal and failed to issue pattadar pass book and title deed in the name of petitioner for the lands in Sy.No.556/2A for an extent of Ac.2.00 cents situated at Nallakalva Village of Atmakur Mandal, Nandyal District amounts to erroneous, arbitrary and violative of Articles 14 and 21 of the Constitution of India, besides being violative of principles of natural justice and consequently to direct the Thasildar, Atmakur to issue pattadar pass book and title deed in the name of writ petitioner relating to lands in Sy.No.556/2A for an extent of Ac.2.00 cents situated at Nallakalva Village of Atmakur Mandal, Nandyal District in the interest of justice and to pass necessary order or orders…

¶28

The case of the petitioner is that there was an oral partition between the petitioner’s father and his brothers, and they received their respective shares. At no point of time did any of them claim the subject property during the lifetime of the petitioner’s father. Be that as it may, the petitioner approached the Tahsildar, Atmakur Mandal,

¶29

¶30

by way of a representation dated 04.07.2025, seeking to update the entries in the ROR and to issue the Pattadar Pass Book and title deed in favour of the petitioner. She also requested the unlocking of the digital signature on the web portal pertaining to the land in Sy.No. 556/2A, for an extent of Ac. 2.00 cents situated at Nallakalva village of Atmakur Mandal, Nandyal District, as the Tahsildar, Atmakur Mandal, had blocked his digital signature on the online web portal in respect of land in Survey No. 556/2A to an extent of Ac. 2.00 cents and failed to issue the Pattadar Pass Book and title deed in favour of the petitioner. Hence, the present Writ Petition is filed, seeking a direction to the respondent authorities to update the digital signature on the web portal and to issue Pattadar Pass Book and title deed in favour of the petitioner for the above-mentioned survey number.

¶31

Learned Assistant Government Pleader has placed written instructions dated 08.09.2025. The said written instructions indicate that the writ petitioner S. Santha Kumari D/o P. Balanna has requested to issue Pattadar Pass Book and title deed on the ground that she has inherited the land in Sy.No.556/2A got entries in the Webland to an extent Ac. 2.00 cents and the land is barren and not in cultivation and the entries in the Webland is prior to resurvey published on 18.01.2024, the name was not reflected in UAT Webland Adangal. And the petitioner has approached the Tahsildar-

¶32

¶33

4^th respondent for UAT Webland entry and issuance of pattadar pass book.

¶34

While it was in this state, the son of P. Danamaiah namely Pustela Venkataiah had approached the office of Tahsildar and raised an objection and stated that the subject land was assigned to his grandfather Sri Pustela Narasaiah and his grandfather had 4 sons viz., 1) Sri P. Danamaiah, 2) Sri P. Nadipenna, 3) Sri P. Bodenna and Sri P. Balanna. And father of the writ petitioner P. Balanna who is younger son of P. Narasaiah while discharging duties as Village Revenue Assistant and as Village Revenue Inspector using his official position got the entries in the Webland despite remaining the other 3 sons of P. Narasaiah. In view of the of family dispute the mutation has not been carried out and the same was informed to the writ petitioner through the Public Grievance Redressal System (P.G.R.S.) vide NND202501272569 to resolve the family dispute exist between the present writ petitioner and legal heirs of P. Narasaiah.

¶35

There is a family dispute existing in between the petitioner and Sri P.Venkataiah with regard to right over the property. And it is the contention of the Sri P. Venkataiah that the land in Survey No.556/2A is assigned land and it was assigned in favour of his grandfather Sri P. Narsaiah and he is having share.

¶36

¶37

Without going into the merits of the case, this Court is inclined

¶38

to dispose of the Writ Petition at the admission stage by directing the respondent No.4 to conduct an enquiry and pass an appropriate order after issuing notices to both the writ petitioner and Sri P. Venkataiah and communicate the decision to the parties.

¶39