Ponnam Koteswara Rao Vs the State of Andhra Pradesh

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 a writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the 2nd Respondents in not taking any action pursuant to report submitted vide Rc.DT/10/2024 dated.20.01.2024 by the 4th Respondent requesting that the land in Sy.No.442/1 to an extent of Ac. 1.00 cents and Sy.No.442/1 to an extent of Ac. 1.00 cents in total Ac.2.00 cents of Kondapi Village and Mandal, Prakasam District to delete from Prohibited properties list U/s 22A(1)(A) of

¶19

2

¶20

HBKM,J W.P.No.25188 of 2025

¶21

A.P.Registratraion Act,1908 in spite of the petitioner's several personal appraoches as illegal, arbitrary and Un constitutional and voilative of Articles 14, 300-A of Constitituion of India and consequently to direct the Respondents to delet the land admeasuring extent of Sy.No.442/1 to an extent of Ac.1.00 cents and Sy.No.442/1 to an extent of Ac. 1.00 cents in total Ac.2.00 cents of Kondapi Village and Mandal, Prakasam from the list of Prohibited properties list by duly declaring the same as private patta in favour of the petitioner and to pass

¶22

IA NO: 1 OF 2025

¶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 pleased to direct the Respondents to delete the land admeasuring an extent of Sy.No.442/1 to an extent of Ac.1.00 cents and Sy.No.442/1 to ane extent of Ac.1.00 cents in total Ac.2.00 cents of Kondapi Village and Mandal, Prakasam District from the list of Prohibited properties list by duly declaring the same as private patta in favour of the petitioner forthwith pending disposal of the above writ petition and to pass

¶24

Counsel for the Petitioner:

¶25

1.SHAIK MEERAVALI

¶26

Counsel for the Respondent(S):

¶27

1.GP FOR REVENUE

¶28

3

¶29

HBKM,J W.P.No.25188 of 2025

¶30

The Court made the following Order:

¶31

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

¶32

This writ petition was filed questioning the action of the 2^nd respondent in not taking any action pursuant to the report submitted vide Rc.DT/10/2024 dated 20.01.2024 by the 4^th respondent requesting that the land in Sy.No.442/1 to an extent of Ac.1.00 cents and Sy.No.442/1 to an extent of Ac.1.00 cents in total Ac.2.00 cents of Kondapi Village and Mandal, Prakasam District to delete from the Prohibited Properties List U/s 22A(1)(A) of A.P. Registration Act, 1908 (herein after referred as “the Act”) in spite of the petitioner's several personal approaches.

¶33

On the other hand, the learned Assistant Government Pleader relying upon the written instructions of the 4^th respondent dated 25.09.2025 submits that the then Tahsildar, Kondapi has submitted a report dated 20.01.2024 to the 2^nd respondent through the 3^rd respondent stating that “he inspected the proposed land measuring an extent of Ac.4.38 cents of Kondapi Village of Kondapi Mandal along with the Mandal Surveyor and found that the land is under possession and enjoyment of the applicant for the last several years. The then Tahsildar, Kondapi Mandal has mistakenly included an extent of Ac.1.00 cents in Sy.No.442/1 and Ac.1.00 cents in Sy.No.442/1 instead of Sy.Nos.442/1A to an extent of Ac.1.00 cents and Sy.No.442/1A to an extent of Ac.1.00 cents of Kondapi Village of Kondapi Mandal in the prohibited

¶34

4

¶35

HBKM,J W.P.No.25188 of 2025

¶36

properties list of immovable properties under Section 22-A (1) (A) of the Act and finally requested that the Sy.No.442/1 for an extent of Ac.1.00 cents and Sy.No.442/1 for an extent of Ac.1.00 cents of Kondapi Revenue Village may be deleted from the prohibited properties list under Section 22-A (1) (A) of the Act by including the Sy.Nos.442/1A of Ac.1.00 cents and Sy.No.442/1A of Ac.1.00 cents of Kondapi Village of Kondapi Mandal in the prohibited properties list.

¶37

Since the Revenue Divisional Officer, Ongole has not received proposals for deletion of the subject lands from the prohibited properties list, the Tahsildar, Kondapi undertakes to revise the proposal for deletion of the subject lands from the prohibited properties list once again and action will be taken basing upon the decision taken by the District Level Scrutiny Committee, Ongole.

¶38

In view of the above said facts and circumstances and upon consideration of the rival submissions made, it is to be seen that mistakenly the subject land is included in the prohibited properties list by the then Tahsildar, Kondapi Mandal and in view of the same, the petitioner is permitted to make a representation to the 3^rd respondent, enclosing all the necessary documents, in support of his claim, within a period of four (04) weeks from the date of receipt of this order. On receipt of such representation from the petitioner, the 3^rd respondent shall consider and dispose of the same, strictly in accordance with law by hearing all the parties concerned, including the

¶39

5

¶40

HBKM,J W.P.No.25188 of 2025

¶41

petitioner, giving due opportunity, upon verification of the records, the instructions of the 4^th respondent dated 25.09.2025 addressed to the Government Pleader for Revenue, High Court of Andhra Pradesh, Amaravati and the subject land, appropriate decision shall be taken on its own merits as expeditiously as possible, preferably within a period of two (02) months thereafter. The written instructions of the 4^th respondent dated 25.09.2025 shall be made as part of the Court record.

¶42

Accordingly, this Writ Petition is disposed of. There shall be no order

¶43

as to costs. Interim order, if any, deemed to have been vacated.

¶44

As a sequel, Interlocutory Applications pending, if any, shall stand closed.

¶45

__________________________ JUSTICE B. KRISHNA MOHAN

¶46

22.01.2026 PGT

Ponnam Koteswara Rao v. the State of Andhra Pradesh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ponnam Koteswara Rao 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

K Sahadeva Vs the State of Ap

L Rama Murthy Vs the State of Andhra Pradesh

Gurrapusala Yedukondalu Vs the State of Andhra Pradesh

Koruprolu Simhachalam, Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh

Velamala Jagadeeswara Rao Vs the State of Ap

Alavala Narasimha Reddy Vs the State of Andhra Pradesh