Jampani Sreenivasa Rao, Vs State of Andhra Pradesh

¶1

[3330]

¶2

APHC010461262025

¶3

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

¶4

TUESDAY,THE SEVENTH DAY OF OCTOBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE

¶5

PRESENT

¶6

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE TARLADA RAJASEKHAR RAO WRIT PETITION NO: 23406/2025

¶7

Between:

¶8

JAMPANI SREENIVASA RAO,, S/O. SYDULU CHOUDHARY AGED ABOUT 64 YEARS, OCC- PRIVATE SERVICE, R/O. H.NO. 2-19-83, STREET NO.6, KALYANAPURI, UPPAL, MEDCHAL-MALKAJGIRI DISTRICT, TELANGANA STATE500039.

¶9

...PETITIONER

¶10

AND

¶11

STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, REVENUE DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT BUILDINGS VELAGAPUDI, AMARAVATI, ANDHRA PRADESH.

¶12

THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, GUNTUR DISTRICT, GUNTUR, ANDHRA PRADESH.

¶13

THE REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER, GUNTUR, GUNTUR DISTRICT, ANDHRA PRADESH.

¶14

THE MANDAL REVENUE OFFICER, MEDIKONDURU MANDAL, GUNTUR DISTRICT, ANDHRA PRADESH.

¶15

THE VILLAGE REVENUE OFFICER, PERECHERLA VILLAGE, MEDIKONDURU MANDAL, GUNTUR DISTRICT, ANDHRA PRADESH.

¶16

...RESPONDENT(S):

¶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 topleased to issue an order, direction or writ, more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the inaction of the respondents in deleting Ac.0.52 cents in Sy.No. 328 of Perecherla Village, Medikonduru Mandal, Guntur district, despite the land being freehold and ignoring the repeated applications of the petitioners family as illegal, arbitrary, against the provisions of the Registration Act, 1908, and unconstitutional and consequently direct the respondents to forthwith delete the land of Ac.0.52 cents in Sy.No.328 of Perecherla Village, Medikonduru Mandal, Guntur district and pass

¶18

IA NO: 1 OF 2025

¶19

Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the

¶20

2

¶21

High Court may be pleased pleased to direct the respondents to forthwith consider the latest application of the petitioner dated 17.07.2025 and delete the land of Ac.0.52 cents in Sy.No.328 of Perecherla Village, Medikonduru Mandal, Guntur district, pending disposal of the Writ Petition and pass

¶22

Counsel for the Petitioner:

¶23

1.SRINIVASA RAO BODDULURI

¶24

Counsel for the Respondent(S):

¶25

1.GP FOR REVENUE

¶26

3

¶27

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE TARLADA RAJASEKHAR RAO WRIT PETITION No.23406 of 2025

¶28

ORDER:-

¶29

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

¶30

“… to issue a writ, order or orders, more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the inaction of the respondents in deleting Ac.0.52 cents in Sy.No.328 of Perecherla Village, Medikonduru Mandal, Guntur district, despite the land being freehold and ignoring the repeated applications of the petitioner’s family as illegal, arbitrary, against the provisions of the Registration Act, 1908, and unconstitutional and consequently direct the respondents to forthwith delete the land of Ac.0.52 cents in Sy.No.328 of Perecherla Village, Medikonduru Mandal, Guntur district and pass such other order.…”

¶31

The 4^th respondent-Tahsildar, has placed the land in Sy.No.328 of Perecherla Village, Medikonduru Mandal, Guntur District, on the prohibitory list under Section 22A(1)(a) of the Registration Act, 1908. Challenging this action, the present writ petition has been filed on the ground that the said property was originally assigned to one late Smt. Lakshmi Saraswati, W/o P.V.Avadhanram, on 12.11.1972, upon payment of market value at the rate of Rs. 500/- per acre, payable in 15 equal installments. The land, however, remained under the occupation of cultivating farmers.

¶32

The assignee Smt.Lakshmi Saraswati, after having paid 12 installments by 1986, claimed ownership of the land, but was unable to mutate her name in the revenue records due to the ongoing cultivation

¶33

4

¶34

by farmers. Upon her demise, the Mandal Revenue Officer (MRO), Medikonduru, issued an order dated 12.05.1992 to transfer the title in favour of P.V. Avadhani. Consequently, his name was mutated in the revenue records. As P.V.Avadhani was unable to obtain possession from the cultivating farmers, he agreed to transfer the title in favour of the cultivating farmers. The petitioner’s father purchased an extent of Ac.0.52 cents in Sy.No.328 through Document No. 205/1995. His name was duly mutated in the revenue records, and he subsequently mortgaged the land to obtain an agricultural loan.

¶35

However, without any notice, the land in Sy.No.328 was placed on the prohibitory list. The petitioner’s father, being a landless poor person, was not given any prior opportunity of hearing before this action was taken. Hence, the present writ petition is filed seeking a direction to the respondent authorities to delete the land in Sy.No.328 from the prohibitory list under Section 22A(1)(a) of the Registration Act, 1908.

¶36

Heard Sri Srinivasa Rao Bodduluri, learned counsel for petitioner and learned Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue for respondents.

¶37

Learned Assistant Government Pleader furnished written instructions dated 03.09.2025 (taken on record) addressed by the Tahsildar, Medikonduru Mandal and the relevant paragraph is extracted hereunder:

¶38

5

¶39

“…In this aspect the necessary proposals will be submitted to the Revenue Divisional Officer, Guntur for subdivision of the assignment made for the extent assigned along with proposals for converting into Ayan duly obtaining Resolution of Gram Panchayat as per norms and the request of the Petitioner will be resolved as per due process of law…”

¶40

The written instructions indicate that the grievances of the petitioner will be resolved as per due process of law, soon after receiving the proposals for conversion into Ayan, duly supported by a resolution of the Gram Panchayat as per the norms.

¶41

Hence, the present Writ Petition is disposed of directing respondent No.3 to take appropriate steps for deleting the property from the prohibitory list, in pursuance to written instructions dated 03.09.2025, as expeditiously as possible. There shall be no order as to costs.

¶42

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

¶43

___________________________________ JUSTICE TARLADA RAJASEKHAR RAO

¶44

Date: 07.10.2025 KBN

Jampani Sreenivasa Rao, v. State of Andhra Pradesh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Jampani Sreenivasa Rao, v. State of Andhra Pradesh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Naradasu Banaramma Vs the State of Andhra Pradesh

Shamabegum Vs the State of Ap

Seelam Santha Kumari Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh

Shaik Saidamma @ Saida Bi Vs the State of Andhra Pradesh

Murala Rathnaiah Vs the State of Andhra Pradesh

Sk. Masum Saheb, Vs The State of A.P