Adapa Gopal Naidu Vs the State of Andhra Pradesh

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH :: AMARAVATI

¶2

(Special Original Jurisdiction)

¶3

WEDNESDAY, THE NINETEENTH DAY OF MARCH

¶4

TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE

¶5

PRESENT

¶6

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE VENKATESWARLU NIMMAGADDA WRIT PETITION NO: 5867 OF 2025

¶7

Between:

¶8

Adapa Gopal Naidu, S/o. Adapa Maalam Naidu, Aged about 45 years, Occupation Coolie, Thumpada Village, Kidangi, Alluri Sitharama Raju District - 531024.

¶9

...PETITIONER

¶10

AND

¶11

The State of Andhra Pradesh, Rep. by its Principal Secretary, Revenue Department, Secretariat, Velagapudi, Amaravathi, Alluri Sitharama Raju District.

¶12

The District Collector and Magistrate, Alluri Sitharama Raju District at Paderu.

¶13

The District Joint Collector, Alluri Sitharama Raju^{DistrictatPaderu.}

¶14

The Integrated Tribal Development Agency (I.T.D.A), Rep. by Project Officer(PO), Alluri Sitharama Raju District at Paderu.

¶15

The Sub Registrar, Paderu, Alluri Sitharama Raju^District

¶16

The Sub Collector/ Revenue Divisional Officer, Paderu, Alluri Sitharama Raju District.

¶17

The Tahsildar, Paderu, Alluri Sitharama Raju District.

¶18

The Mandal Revenue Inspector, Paderu, Alluri Sitharama Raju District.

¶19

The Village Revenue Officer, Paderu-3, Alluri Sitharama Raju District.

¶20

lO.Thamarbha Rajesh Padal, S/o. Ramayya Padal, Sanyasamma Village, Thumpada Panchayat, Hukum Peta Mandal, Alluri Sitharama Raju District - 53107

¶21

...RESPONDENTS

¶22

Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India is filed praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased to issue an order, writ or direction, more particularly one in the nature of WRIT OF MANDAMUS to declare the inaction of the Respondents, specifically 2nd Respondent is not disposing the File NO. 33/2023 regarding the land dispute

¶23

between the Petitioner and unofficial Respondent is pending before the District Collectors Court (Revenue) as illegal, violation of Articles 14 and 300(A) of the nd Constitution of India and consequently direct the Respondents, specifically 2 Respondent to dispose the File No. 33/2023 before the District Collectors Court (Revenue) regarding the land dispute between the Petitioner and unofficial Respondent within two months. Counsel for the Petitioner:SRI. KETHVATHU PARVATHI BAI Counsel for the Respondent No’s. 1 to 3, 6 to 9: GP FOR REVENUE Counsel for the Respondent No.4: GP FOR TRIBAL WELFARE Counsel for the Respondent No.5: GP FOR REGISTRATION & STAMPS Counsel for the Respondent No.10: — The Court made the following ORDER:

¶24

APHC010117312025

¶25

050 05*:^n. -j_v

¶26

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI

¶27

(Special Original Jurisdiction)

¶28

[3329]

¶29

WEDNESDAY .THE NINETEENTH DAY OF MARCH TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE

¶30

PRESENT

¶31

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE VENKATESWARLU NIMMAGADDA

¶32

WRIT PETITION NO: 5867/2025

Between:

Adapa Gopal Naidu

...PETITIONER

AND

The State Of Andhra Pradesh and Others

¶38

...RESPONDENT(S)

¶39

Counsel for the Petitioner:

¶40

1.KETHVATHU PARVATHI BAI

¶41

Counsel for the Respondent(S):

¶42

1.GP FOR REVENUE

¶43

2.GP FOR SOCIAL WELFARE

¶44

3.GP FOR REGISTRATION AND STAMPS

¶45

The Court made the following:

¶46

2

¶47

THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE VENKATESWARLU NIMMAGADDA

¶48

WRIT PETITION NO: 5867/2025

¶49

ORDER;

¶50

This writ petition is filed under Article 226 of the^Constitution of the India seeking the following reliefs;-

¶51

“to issue a writ, order or direction more particularly^one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declare the Inaction of the Respondents, specifically 2"'^ Respondent is not disposing the File No. 33/2023 regarding the land dispute between the Petitioner and unofficial Respondent is pending before the District Collector’s Court (Revenue) as illegal, violation of Articles 14 and 300-A of the Constitution of India and consequently direct the respondents, specifically² nd respondent to dispose the File No. 33/2023 before the District Collector’s Court (Revenue) regarding the land dispute between the Petitioner and unofficial Respondent within two months and pass such other order. ”

¶52

The case of the petitioner is that respondent No.10 illegally

¶53

registered the land admeasuring to an extent of Ac.5.00 cents apart from Ac.0.30 cents in Sy.No.14/2 vide Doc.No.23/2005 dated 16.05.2005. The petitioner made a representation/complaint^videFile No.33/2023 before the 2"'"^ respondent seeking for^cancellation of document No.23/2005. But till date the 2^^ respondent did not consider the same. Hence, the present Writ Petition.

¶54

Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Assistant Government Pleader for the respondents.

¶55

Though the petitioner made several allegations against^the respondents, during hearing, learned counsel for the petitioner requested this Court, without touching the merits of the case, to -\

¶56

%

¶57

3

¶58

issue a direction to the respondents to dispose of the representation/complaint.

¶59

Learned Assistant Government Pleader for the respondents furnished written instructions dated 19.03.2025 wherein it is stated as follows;

¶60

“In this regard, it is submitted that the 2"^ respondent has taken up the petition in the year 16.12.2022 and issued notices to both parties to appear before the^{2""^} respondent along with relevant documents available with both parties on 28.01.2023 vide this office letter in RefE2/33/2023 dated 23.01.2023 and conducted two hearings on 28.01.2023 & 29.09.2023 from the last date of hearing both parties have not attend for court nor filed any counter affidavit in this Court so far.

¶61

In this connection, it is to submit that we have issuing fresh notices to both parties from this office and dispose ’’ the case at an earliest as per merits within two months.

¶62

In view of the written instructions furnished by^thelearned

¶63

Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue, this Court need not decide the truth or otherwise of the allegations made in the petition. This Court is conscious that no such direction be issued, in view of the judgment of the Apex Court in “The Government of India v. P.Venkatesh^”, wherein the Apex Court held that such orders may make for a quick or easy disposal of cases in overburdened adjudicatory institutions. But, they do not serve to the cause of

¶64

2019 (8) SCALE 544

¶65

counsel for the petitioner himself requested to justice. As the learned issue a direction to dispose of the representation/complaint, this other alternative except to issue such direction. Court find no

¶66

In the result, the writ petition is disposed of, directing the 2"“ respondent to consider the representation/complaint vide File No. 33/2023 and pass appropriate orders in accordance with law after issuing notices and providing opportunity of hearing to the period of period of three{3) months from parties concerned, within a of this order. There shall be no order as to the date of receipt of copy costs.

¶67

miscellaneous application, pending, if any, shall As a sequel

also stand closed.

//TRUE COPY//

SECTION OFFICER

To,

Andhra Pradesh, 1. The Principal Secretary, Revenue Departnrent, State of Secretariat, Velagapudi, Amaravathi, Alluri Sitharama^RajuDrstnct.

¶73

Alluri Sitharama Raju District at Paderu.

¶74

1. The District Collector and Magistrate 3. The District Joint Collector, Alluri Sitharama Raju District at Paderu. Tribal Development Agency (I.T.D.A),

¶75

1. The Project Officer(PO), Integrated Alluri Sitharama Raju District at Paderu. Paderu, Alluri Sitharama Raju District

¶76

1. The Sub Registrar,

¶77

Paderu, Alluri Sitharama Raju District

¶78

1. The Sub Registrar, 6. The Sub Collector/ Revenue Divisional^{Officer,Paderu,AlluriSitharamaRaju} District.

¶79

7 The Tahsildar, Paderu, Alluri Sitharama Raju District s' The Mandal Revenue Inspector, Paderu, Alluri Sitharama Ra,u Drstnct. 9 The Village Revenue Officer, Paderu-3, Alluri Sitharama Raiu District. KETHVATHU PARVATHI BAI, Advocate [OPUC]

¶80