Dismissed¶50

A Harinatha Reddy v. the State of Andhra Pradesh

Andhra Pradesh HC4 Feb 2026WP/205/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Article 226 — disputed question of title — writ court cannot determine rights and title over property — dispossession without notice by Tahsildar — Sy.No.291/1, Itikalapalli Village, Ananthapuramu Rural Mandal — D.K.T. Patta 13.01.1996 — ADCC Bank auction and sale certificate — registered sale deed 5528/2019 dated 04.05.2019 — G.O.Ms.No.902 Revenue dated 30.08.1972 — Sri Krishnadevaraya University P.G. Centre — Government Dry Assessed Waste land — writ petition dismissed with liberty to approach appropriate forum — W.P.No.205 of 2023, decided 05.02.2026, Tarlada Rajasekhar Rao, J.

What did the court decide?

No substantive relief; petitioner at liberty to file appropriate proceedings before the appropriate forum. No order as to costs. Miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shall stand closed. ¶50

A Harinatha Reddy Vs the State of Andhra… — Writ and Judicial Review | Andhra Pradesh HC (2026)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

No substantive relief; petitioner at liberty to file appropriate proceedings before the appropriate forum. No order as to costs. Miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shall stand closed.

¶50

Issue for consideration

Whether the action of respondent No.3-Tahsildar in trying to dispossess the petitioner from Ac.4.00 Cents in Sy.No.291/1 of Itikalapalli Village, Ananthapuramu Rural Mandal, without issuing notice, is arbitrary, illegal, unconstitutional and against the principles of natural justice, and whether the petitioner is entitled to a direction restraining dispossession without due process of law. +1 more

¶17

Ratio / Principle

This Court, exercising jurisdiction under Article 226, is not inclined to adjudicate disputed questions of title, more so when the counter-affidavit reveals discrepancies regarding the extent of land and assignment; this Court cannot enter into determination of rights and title over property in writ jurisdiction.

¶48

Key takeaways

Any such discrepancy or claim to title must be agitated before the appropriate forum.ratio¶48
The present Writ Petition is dismissed.ratio¶50
The petitioner is at liberty to file appropriate proceedings before the appropriate forum; there shall be no order as to costs.ratio¶51

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Writ Petition (High Court of Andhra Pradesh, Amaravati) under Article 226 by purchaser of Ac.4.00 cents in Sy.No.291/1 of Itikalapalli Village, claiming title under D.K.T. Patta dated 13.01.1996, bank auction sale certificate and registered sale deed Doc.No.5528/2019 dated 04.05.2019, seeking a mandamus against the Tahsildar's attempt to dispossess him without notice. The revenue counter-affidavit asserted that Ac.8.12 cents in Sy.No.291-1 was never assigned, is Government Dry Assessed Waste (dotted) land, and stood alienated to Sri Krishnadevaraya University for its P.G. Centre vide G.O.Ms.No.902 (Revenue) dated 30.08.1972. Held, by Tarlada Rajasekhar Rao, J.: there being a cloud over the title and discrepancies as to extent and assignment, the writ court under Article 226 will not adjudicate disputed questions of title and cannot determine rights and title over property in writ jurisdiction; any such claim must be agitated before the appropriate forum. Writ petition dismissed with liberty to approach the appropriate forum; no order as to costs; miscellaneous petitions closed.

¶1

APHC010004082023

¶2

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

¶3

[3330]

¶4

THURSDAY,THE FIFTH DAY OF FEBRUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX

¶5

PRESENT

¶6

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE TARLADA RAJASEKHAR RAO

¶7

WRIT PETITION NO: 205/2023

¶8

Between:

¶9

A HARINATHA REDDY, S/O. LATE. A.RANGA REDDY, AGED ABOUT 52 YEARS, OCC. BUSINESS. RESIDENT OF D.NO.12-34A, BANGARUCHINNAPALLI VILLAGE, KOTHACHERUVU MANDAL, ANANTHAPURAMU DISTRICT. PRESENTLY RESIDING AT D.NO.6-4314, MARUTHI NAGARA, ANANTHAPURAMU TOWN AND DISTRICT.

¶10

...PETITIONER

¶11

AND

¶12

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

¶13

THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, ANANTHAPURAMU DISTRICT.

¶14

THE TAHSILDAR, ANANTHAPURAMU RURAL MANDAL, ANANTHAPURAMU DISTRICT

¶15

SRI KRISHNADEVARAYA UNIVERSITY, REP. BY ITS REGISTRAR, ANANTHAPUR, ANDHRA PRADESH - 515003 R4 IS IMPLEADED AS PER THE ORDER OF THIS COURT, DT.27.09.2023 VIDE ORDER PASSED IN I.A.3 OF 2023.

¶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 to issue a Writ of Mandamus or any other appropriate Writ, Order or direction declaring the action of the 3rd Respondent herein in trying to dispossess the petitioner from land measuring an extent of Ac.4.00 Cents situate in

¶18

¶19

Sy.No.291/1 of Itikalapalli Village, Ananthapuramu Rural Mandal, Ananthapuramu District, without issuing notice, as arbitrary, illegal, unconstitutional and against the principles of natural justice and consequently direct the 3rd Respondent herein not to dispossess the petitioner from land measuring an extent of Ac.4.00 Cents situate in Sy.No.291/1 of Itikalapalli Village, Ananthapuramu Rural Mandal, Ananthapuramu District., without following due process of law and pass

¶20

IA NO: 1 OF 2023

¶21

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 pleased to direct the Respondent No.3 herein not to interfere with land measuring an extent of Ac.4.00 Cents situate in Sy.No.291/1 of Itikalapalli Village, Ananthapuramu Rural Mandal, Ananthapuramu District belonging to the petitioner, pending disposal of t he Writ Petition before this Hon'ble Court.

¶22

IA NO: 2 OF 2023

¶23

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 dated 03.01.2023 passed in I.A.No.1 of 2023 in W.P.No.205 of 2023 and pass

¶24

IA NO: 3 OF 2023

¶25

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 pass orders impleading the Proposed Respondent No.4 as Respondent No.4 in WP.No.205 of 2023 and in IA.No.1 of 2023 in WP.No.205 of 2023

¶26

Counsel for the Petitioner:

¶27

1.T NAGARJUNA REDDY

¶28

Counsel for the Respondent(S):

¶29

1.O UDAYA KUMAR SC For S K UNIVERSITY

¶30

2.GP FOR REVENUE

¶31

The Court made the following:

¶32

¶33

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE TARLADA RAJASEKHAR RAO WRIT PETITION No.205 OF 2023

¶34

ORDER:

¶35

The present Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of

¶36

India seeking the following relief:

¶37

“… to issue a Writ of Mandamus or any other appropriate Writ, Order or direction declaring the action of the 3^rd Respondent herein in trying to dispossess the petitioner from land measuring an extent of Ac.4.00 Cents situated in Sy.No.291/1 of Itikalapalli Village, Ananthapuramu Rural Mandal, Ananthapuramu District, without issuing notice, as arbitrary, illegal, unconstitutional and against the principles of natural justice and consequently direct the 3^rd Respondent herein not to dispossess the petitioner from land measuring an extent of Ac.4.00 Cents situated in Sy.No.291/1 of Itikalapalli Village, Ananthapuramu Rural Mandal, Ananthapuramu District., without following due process of law and pass such other order or orders…”

¶38

The short grievance of the petitioner is that the petitioner is the absolute owner of the land admeasuring Ac.4.00 cents situated in Sy.No.291/1 of Itikalapalli Village, Ananthapuramu Rural Mandal, Ananthapuramu District. Originally, the land in Sy.No.291/1 belongs to the Government. The then revenue officials issued D.K.T. Patta dated 13.01.1996 in favour of one Smt. Mannala Gangeswaramma W/o. Peddanna. Since then, she has been in possession and enjoyment of the said property. Thereafter, she mortgaged the property to the Ananthapur District Co-operative Central Bank Ltd., (ADCC Bank) for agricultural purpose. As she unable to pay the dues, bank conducted auction on 11.07.2025, wherein one Sri Desaireddy Sankar Reddy

¶39

¶40

emerged as the successful bidder. The Bank issued a sale certificate dated 14.07.2025 in his favour, mutated his name in all revenue records, and issued pattadar passbooks and title deeds. Subsequently, Sri Desairedddy Sankar Reddy sold the property to the petitioner herein by way of registered sale deed vide document No.5528/2019, dated 04.05.2019. Ever since the date of purchase, petitioner has been in peaceful possession and enjoyment of the said property. Now, the respondents are trying to dispossess the petitioner without following due process of law. Hence, the present writ petition has been filed.

¶41

Heard Sri T.Nagarjuna Reddy, learned counsel for the petitioner, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue for respondent Nos.1 to 3 and Sri O.Udaya Kumar, learned Standing Counsel for respondent No.4.

¶42

The petitioner herein filed I.A.No.3 of 2023 to implead University as respondent No.4 to the writ petition as well as to interlocutory applications. The said I.A. was allowed by this Court on 27.09.2023, and the respondent No.4-University was brought on record. Despite lapse of two and half years, the University has not filed any counter-affidavit.

¶43

The revenue department had filed counter-affidavit stating that the land admeasuring Ac.8.12 cents in Sy.No.291-1 situated at Itikalapalli Village was never assigned to elseone as per the records available in the office and the said record clearly establishes that the said land is Government Dry Assessed Waste (dotted) land. The said land has been alienated in favour of Sri

¶44

¶45

Krishnadevarya Univeristy for P.G.Centre vide G.O.Ms.No.902, Revenue Department, dated 30.08.1972. Further, no records are available to substantiate any assignment. Therefore, the petitioner cannot claim any right or title over the property. Hence, prayed to dismiss the writ petition.

¶46

It is the contention of the petitioner that the property was assigned to assignee by name Smt. Mannala Gangeswaramma and she has mortgaged the property to the Ananthapur District Co-operative Central Bank Ltd.,. As she unable to redeem the mortgaged property, the Bank conducted auction, wherein Sri Desairedddy Sankar Reddy purchased the said property and sale certificate was issued on 14.07.2005 and the petitioner subsequently purchased the property vide registered sale deed dated 04.05.2019.

¶47

According to counter-affidavit, the subject land is Government land and assigned some portion to respondent No.4-University vide G.O.Ms.No.902, Revenue Department, dated 30.08.1972.

¶48

Admittedly, there is cloud over the title of the subject property. This Court, in exercise of jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, is not inclined to adjudicate disputed questions of title, more so when the counter-affidavit reveals discrepancies regarding the extent of land and assignment. Any such discrepancy or claim to title must be agitated before the appropriate forum. This Court cannot enter into determination of rights and title over property in writ jurisdiction.

¶49

¶50

Therefore, the present Writ Petition is dismissed. The petitioner, if so

¶51

advised, is at liberty to file appropriate proceedings before appropriate forum. There shall be no order as to costs.

¶52

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

¶53

__________________________________ JUSTICE TARLADA RAJASEKHAR RAO

Date: 05.02.2026

KBN

128

THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE TARLADA RAJASEKHAR RAO

¶59

WRIT PETITION No.205 of 2023

¶60

Date: 05.02.2026

¶61

KBN

Procedural history

How this case reached the court

AI extract

Order under challenge
Action of respondent No.3-Tahsildar in trying to dispossess the petitioner from Ac.4.00 Cents in Sy.No.291/1 of Itikalapalli Village, Ananthapuramu Rural Mandal, without issuing notice, alleged to be arbitrary, illegal, unconstitutional and against the principles of natural justice.¶17
Respondent No.3 - Tahsildar, Ananthapuramu Rural Mandal, Ananthapuramu District
Prior proceeding
D.K.T. Patta dated 13.01.1996 issued by then revenue officials in favour of Smt. Mannala Gangeswaramma W/o. Peddanna in respect of the subject land.¶38
Prior proceeding
Smt. Mannala Gangeswaramma mortgaged the property to the Ananthapur District Co-operative Central Bank Ltd. (ADCC Bank) for agricultural purpose.¶38
Prior proceeding
Bank auction (dated 11.07.2025 as printed at para 38) in which Sri Desaireddy Sankar Reddy emerged as successful bidder; sale certificate dated 14.07.2025 issued in his favour with mutation and pattadar passbooks/title deeds (para 46 records the sale certificate as dated 14.07.2005).¶40
Prior proceeding
Registered sale deed document No.5528/2019 dated 04.05.2019 executed by Sri Desairedddy Sankar Reddy in favour of the petitioner; petitioner in possession since purchase.¶40
Prior proceeding
Interim order dated 03.01.2023 passed in I.A.No.1 of 2023 in W.P.No.205 of 2023; its vacation was sought in I.A.No.2 of 2023.¶23
Prior proceeding
I.A.No.3 of 2023 for impleadment of respondent No.4-University allowed by the Court on 27.09.2023; the University did not file any counter-affidavit despite lapse of two and half years.¶42
Prior proceeding
Counter-affidavit of the revenue department: Ac.8.12 cents in Sy.No.291-1 at Itikalapalli Village was never assigned and is Government Dry Assessed Waste (dotted) land; no records substantiate any assignment.¶43
Prior proceeding
As per the counter-affidavit, the land was alienated in favour of Sri Krishnadevaraya University for its P.G. Centre vide G.O.Ms.No.902, Revenue Department, dated 30.08.1972.¶45

A Harinatha Reddy v. the State of Andhra Pradesh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

A Harinatha Reddy v. the 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

Nagabathula Ganapathi Rao Vs R Mahesh Kumar IAS

M/s. Sundeep Ravindra Engineers and Contractors Vs the State of Andhra Pradesh

Y Hemavathi Vs the State of Andhra Pradesh

B Indiramma Vs the State of Andhra Pradesh

Deepika Constructions Vs the State of Andhra Pradesh

Deepika Constructions Vs the State of Andhra Pradesh