Allagadda Harisarvothama Rao Vs the State of Ap

“to issue a writ order or direction more particularly one in nature of writ of Mandamus to direct the 5^th respondent to implement the orders of the 4^th respondent vide proceedings in Rc.No.44/2022, dated 29.06.2022 to delete the entries in the revenue records in favour of the respondent issued with IB no.530 and make necessary entries in favour of the petitioner in revenue records and to consider and dispose of my application dt 17.12.2024 and to pass orders”

¶21

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

¶22

The case of the petitioner is that the petitioner is the original pattadar and possessor of the subject agricultural land, admeasuring to an extent of Ac.0.90 cents in Sy.No.616/u, situated at Erragudur, hamlet of Pamulapadu village, Pamulapadu Mandal, Nandyal District and having acquired the subject land by inheritance from his father, as it is classified as an ancestral property. However, the 6th respondent herein erroneously got his name mutated in the revenue records in respect of the subject property. Aggrieved by this, the petitioner lodged a complaint before the revenue authorities, i.e., the 4th respondent herein, seeking deletion of the illegal entries made in favour of the 6th respondent. Pursuant to the petitioner's complaint, and after conducting a detailed enquiry, the 4th respondent passed an order dated 29.06.2022, which reads as follows:

¶23

“ Sri. Chitti Nargarjuna reddy s/o Chalama Reddy, resident of Erragudur H/o Pamulapadu village of Pamulapadu Mandal, Pattadar passbooks issued with IB.No.530 is hereby ordered for deletion and made necessary entries in favour of the petitioner in revenue Mandal is directed to take necessary action in the matter. Records. The Tahsildar, Pamulapdu”.

¶24

The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the 4th respondent specifically directed the 5th respondent to record the name of the petitioner as pattadar and possessor in the revenue records in accordance with the provisions of the Andhra Pradesh Rights in Land and Pattadar Passbooks Act,

¶25

1971, the 5th respondent has neither mutated the name of the petitioner nor deleted the name of the 6th respondent from the revenue records. Hence, the present Writ Petition.

¶26

On the other hand, the learned Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue, appearing for the respondents, submits that the order dated 29.06.2022 passed by the 4th respondent has been assailed before the Joint Collector i.e., 3^rd respondent, who is the appellate authority under Rule 23 of the Andhra Pradesh Rights in Land and Pattadar Passbooks Rules, 1989, and Section 9 of the Andhra Pradesh Rights in Land and Pattadar Passbooks Act, 1971. The said appeal is pending. Since the statutory appeal is pending, the 5th respondent has not acted upon the order.

¶27

He further submits that, as the rights of both the petitioner and the 6th respondent are now under adjudication in the pending appeal, the petitioner’s claim would be considered after disposal of the appeal.

¶28

Having regard to the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Government Pleader for the respondents, and on perusal of the material on record, this Court is of the considered view that the present Writ Petition can be disposed of by directing the 3rd respondent herein, who is the appellate authority, to dispose of the statutory appeal preferred by the 6th respondent within a period of three months. Following the order in appeal by the 3rd respondent, the 5th respondent is directed to implement the said order within a period of two months after communicating

¶29

the same, after providing an opportunity of hearing to both the petitioner and the 6th respondent. It is further directed that the 5th respondent, while passing the order, shall comply the directions of the appellate authority and by considering the representation of the petitioner dated 17.12.2024.

¶30

With the above said direction, the Writ Petition is disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs.

¶31

Consequently, Miscellaneous Petitions, if any, pending in the writ petition shall stand closed.

¶32

VENKATESWARLU NIMMAGADDA, J

¶33

02.04.2025 klk

¶34

270

¶35

HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE VENKATESWARLU NIMMAGADDA