Jonnakuti @ Tagaram Seshamma, Vs State of Andhra Pradesh

JONNAKUTI @ TAGARAM SESHAMMA,, W/O. LATE VEERAVENKAYYA, AGED ABOUT74 YEARS, OCC. HOUSE HOLD, R/O. ANANTHAPALLI VILLAGE, NALLAJERLA MANDAL, EAST GODAVARI DISTRICT.

¶11

...PETITIONER

¶12

AND

¶13

STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, PANCHAYAT RAJ DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT, VELAGAPUDI, AMARAVATHI, GUNTUR DISTRICT.

¶14

THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR PANCHAYAT WING, EAST GODAVARI DISTRICT AT RAJAMAHENDRAVARAM.

¶15

THE DISTRICT PANCHAYAT OFFICER, EAST GODAVARI AT RAJAMAHENDRAVARAM.

¶16

ANANTHAPALLIGRAM PANCHAYAT, REP. BY ITS PANCHAYAT SECRETARY-CUM-EXECUTIVE AUTHORITY, ANANTHAPALLI VILLAGE, NALLAJERLA MANDAL, EAST GODAVARI DISTRICT.

¶17

GAMPALA DHARMAMMA DIED, W/O. MAANIYYA, AGED ABOUT 64 YEARS, OCC. HOUSE HOLD, R/O.D.NO.7-73, KOTHAPETA, ANANTHAPALLI VILLAGE, NALLAJERLA MANDAL, EAST

¶18

2

¶19

GODAVARI DISTRICT.

¶20

GAMAPALA MAANIYYA S/O VENKAYYA, AGED 70 YEARS, R/O D.NO.7-73, KOTHAPETA,ANANTHAPALLE VILLAGE AND MANDAL, WEST GODAVARI DISTRICT

¶21

GAMAPALA SRINIVASU S/O MAANIYYA, AGED 41 YEARS, R/O D.NO.8-83,SRINIVAS COLONY, ANANTHAPALLE VILLAGE AND MANDAL, WEST GODAVARI DISTRICT

¶22

KOKKIRAPATI RAJAMMA, W/O KOKKIRAPATI BALASWAMY,AGED 56 YEARS,R/O H.NO.3-175, GAVARAVARAM VILLAGE, KOYYALAGUDEM MANDAL, WEST GODAVARI DISTRICT

¶23

DONDAPATI SEETHA, W/O VENKATESWARA RAO, AGED 36 YEARS, R/O 8-192, POTHAVARAM VILLAGE AND MANDAL, WEST GODAVARI DISTRICT. RR 6 TO 9 ARE BROUGHT ON RECORD AS L.RS TO THE DECEASED 5TH RESPONDENT AS PER THE COURT ORDER DT 06.03.2024 VIDE ORDER PASSED IN I.A.NO 01 OF 2024.

¶24

...RESPONDENT(S):

¶25

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 action of respondents 2 to 4, more particularly 4th respondent in changing petitioner house assessment bearing No.1356 unilaterally in favour of the 5th respondent basing on the false information and not considering the spandana complaint dated 29.08.2022, 31.01.2022 and 05.09.2022 submitted requesting to allot the assessment number to petitioner house bearing Door No.10/36, situated in ananthapalli Village of Nallajerla Mandal in East Godavari District as illegal, irregular, biased and violative of principles of natural justice, the provisions of Andhra Pradesh Panchayat Raj Act, 1994 and Rules and Regulations framed there under and offends Articles 14, 21 and 300-A of Constitution of India and consequently direct the Respondents to change the assessments in my

¶26

3

¶27

favour by rectifying the erroneous recording the assessments in the name of 5th Respondent as requested in my representation dt.29.08.2019,05.09.2022 and 31.01.2022 and pass

¶28

IA NO: 1 OF 2022

¶29

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 2 to 4 consider my representation dated 29.08.2022, 05.09.2022 and 31.01.2022, pending disposal of the main Writ Petition and pass

¶30

IA NO: 1 OF 2023

¶31

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 vacate the Interim Order dt. 30.11.2022 in I.A.No.1 of 2022 in W. P. No. 35190 of 2022 and dismiss the Writ Petition in the interests of justice and pass

¶32

IA NO: 2 OF 2023

¶33

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 grant leave to the petitioner herein /respondent No.4 in WP.No.35190 of 2022 to file counter affidavit in the above writ petition and pass

¶34

IA NO: 1 OF 2024

¶35

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 permit the petitioners to come on record as parties/respondents 6 to 9 being Legal Representatives of deceased 5 respondent to the main Writ Petition in WP No. 35190 of 2022 and pending interlocutory applications therein and pass

¶36

IA NO: 2 OF 2024

¶37

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 grant leave to file the Reply Affidavit for the Counter Affidavits filed by the 4th and 5th respondents in the main Writ Petition

¶38

4

¶39

by condoning the delay of 6 months in filing the Reply Affidavit in the interest of Justice and pass

¶40

Counsel for the Petitioner:

¶41

1.PATURI SRINIVAS

¶42

Counsel for the Respondent(S):

¶43

1.GP FOR PANCHAYAT RAJ RURAL DEV

¶44

2.N SRIHARI (Standing Counsel for ZPP MPP and GRAM PANCHAYAT)

¶45

3.NIMMAGADDA REVATHI

¶46

The Court made the following:

¶47

5

¶48

ORDER:

¶49

Aggrieved by the action of the 4^th respondent in changing petitioner house assessment bearing No.1356 unilaterally in favor of the 5^th respondent basing on the false information and not considering the Spandana complaints dated 31.01.2022, 29.08.2022 & 05.09.2022 requesting to allot the assessment number to the petitioner’s house bearing Dr.No.10/36 situated in Ananthapalli Village, Nallajerla Mandal, East Godavari District, the present writ petition is filed.

¶50

Heard Sri Paturi Srinivas, learned counsel for the petitioner, Sri Y.Koteswara Rao, learned Standing Counsel for Gram Panchayat, Smt.Naga Chandrika, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Panchayat Raj and Ms.Satya Haritha, learned counsel representing Smt.Nimmagadda Revathi, learned counsel for the respondents Nos.6 to 9.

¶51

Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that till 2015, the petitioner has been paying tax for the subject house bearing Dr.No.10/36 and after the death of the petitioner’s husband, due to old age problems, she went to her sister’s house. While so, taking advantage of the same and having no children and husband, the 5^th respondent, who is another sister of the petitioner, in order to grab her property, orally reported to the 4^th respondent that the petitioner has died. Thereafter, basing on the false information, the 4^th respondent passed the assessment orders and

¶52

6

¶53

changed the records in favour of the 5^th respondent, who has no title over the subject property and the same belongs to the petitioner. After coming to know about the said fact, the petitioner raised complaints in Spandana Programme in the year 2022 duly requesting the authorities to record her name in the Tax Register belonging to the Gram Panchayat, however, no action has been initiated by the respondents. If the 5^th respondent name is allowed to continue, it affects the rights of the petitioner guaranteed under the Constitution of India, as such, prayed to pass appropriate orders protecting the interest of the petitioner.

¶54

On the other hand, learned Standing Counsel for Gram Panchayat on counter contended that there are civil disputes between the petitioner and the unofficial respondents wherein the Gram Panchayat cannot interfere, as such, the petitioner’s request cannot be adhered, accordingly, prayed to dismiss the writ petition.

¶55

Ms.Satya Haritha, learned counsel representing the learned counsel for the unofficial respondents submitted that the petitioner has paid tax till 2015, however, except the said statement in the affidavit, there is no material to show that the subject property is the petitioner’s property. Without any material, the petitioner cannot claim the subject property. She further submitted that if at all the petitioner has any grievance she has to approach competent civil Court. The writ petition is

¶56

7

¶57

devoid of merits and liable to be dismissed, accordingly, prayed to dismiss the writ petition.

¶58

Perused the record and considered the submissions made by the learned counsel for the parties.

¶59

The contention of the petitioner herein is that till 2015 she paid the

¶60

house tax with assessment No.1356 and the assessment was now changed in favour of the 5^th respondent without any notice. As could be culled out from the facts and circumstances of the case and submissions made by the learned counsel for the parties, it is noticed that the assessment No.1356 has been changed in favour of the 5^th respondent. In the counter, it was categorically stated that pursuant to the interim orders passed by this Court on 13.11.2022, the Gram Panchayat issued show cause notice dated 24.01.2023 to the petitioner and the 5^th respondent calling for objections and to submit relevant documents in respect of the property in dispute. Pursuant to which they submitted their documents on 28.01.2023. The petitioner has produced the registered will executed by her father and the 5^th respondent produced house tax and unregistered will executed by her father, however, both the documents did not disclose any particulars mentioning Survey numbers and door numbers. Further the Gram Panchayat has directed the parties to go to civil Court to agitate their right over the subject property.

¶61

8

¶62

A reply has been filed by the petitioner duly placing on record the proceedings of the Gram Panchayat dated 03.02.2023 vide Rc.No.1/2023. The said proceedings have been passed pursuant to the interim orders granted by this Court on 30.11.2022. The said proceedings would indicate that the Gram Panchayat has categorically admitted that till 2015-16, the house tax was assessed in the name of the petitioner and subsequently the same has been changed in the name of the 5^th respondent. However, no material is placed on record to show that while changing the name of the 5^th respondent in the place of the petitioner, the authorities have followed the procedure contemplated under law. Further, there is no clarity as to whether the subject assessment No.1356 belongs to the subject property or some other property. Therefore, it cannot be said with precision that the said assessment belongs to the subject property.

¶63

Be that as it may, this Court is not inclined to go into those aspects. As rightly stated by the Gram Panchayat when both the parties are claiming title through different wills on the very same property, they have to approach competent civil Court. There is no material on record to show that the said assessment No.1356 has been given to Door No.10/36 (subject property). In view of the same, to meet the ends of justice, this Court is inclined to dispose of the writ petition by passing following order:

¶64

9

¶65

“The Gram Panchayat is directed to look into the records pertaining to the property bearing Dr.No.10/36 and find out whether the assessment number No.1356 claimed by the petitioner has been assigned to the said door number or not. If so, find out whether proper procedure as per Rule 9 of G.O.Ms.NO.30, Panchayat Raj & Rural Development the (PtsIII) Department & Relief, dated 02.01.1995 has been followed before changing the name of the 5^th respondent in house tax register or not. If the said procedure was not followed, hear the petitioner and the 5^th respondent once again and pass orders in accordance with law to set right the clock.”

¶66

Accordingly, the Writ Petition is disposed of . There shall be no order as to costs.

¶67

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

¶68

Date: 18^th December, 2025 RKS

¶69

_____________________________ JUSTICE RAVI CHEEMALAPATI

Jonnakuti @ Tagaram Seshamma, v. State of Andhra Pradesh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Jonnakuti @ Tagaram Seshamma, 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

R.v.Sudhakar, Vs The Satate of Andhra Pradesh

Kurapati Sivakoteswara Rao Vs the State of Andhra Pradesh

B Sreenivasulu Vs the State of Andhra Pradesh

Veerullapadu Mandala Porata Committee Vs the State of Ap

Mogadati Santhosh Kumar Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh

Swarna Sambaiah Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh