Disposed¶448

Vendi Reddamma v. The State of Andhra Pradesh

Andhra Pradesh HC5 Feb 2026WP/30632/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

DKT patta cancellation; resumption of assigned land; non-cultivation within first three years of assignment; service of notice by affixture; acknowledgment on blank sheet; violation of natural justice; Articles 226, 14, 19, 21 and 300-A; Inagaluru Village, Srikalahasti Mandal, Chittoor/Tirupati District; APIIC; RFCTLARR Act 2013; compensation payable on resumption; Andhra Pradesh High Court at Amaravati; R. Raghunandan Rao, J.; decided 06.02.2026; W.P.No.37624 of 2017 & batch.

What did the court decide?

Orders cancelling the petitioners' DKT pattas and resuming their lands set aside; writ petitions disposed of with no order as to costs and pending miscellaneous petitions closed; Government left free to resume the Ac.400.00 handed to the industrial unit subject to payment of compensation as per Mekala Pandu. ¶448

Vendi Reddamma Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh — Land Acquisition | Andhra Pradesh HC (2026)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶448

Issue for consideration

Whether the notices alleged to have been served on the petitioners before the resumption orders, and the resumption orders themselves said to have been served by affixture, were validly served. +1 more

¶434

Court's answer

The Court does not accept that notices of resumption were served on the petitioners prior to the orders, nor that the orders were served on them; service by affixture is acceptable only where personal service was first attempted and failed, since affixture cannot otherwise be demonstrated.

¶435

Ratio / Principle

Following Y.C. Venkata Subbamma and the earlier judgments in B. Mani and G. Munilakshmamma, the DKT pattas granted to the petitioners cannot be cancelled on the mere ground of non-cultivation of the lands for the first three years after assignment, where the initial three-year period is over and considerable time has elapsed.

¶441

Key takeaways

The cancellation of the pattas granted to the petitioners and the resumption of their lands is in violation of law, and the said orders are set aside.ratio¶441
As regards the extent of Ac.400.00 already acquired and handed over to an industrial unit, it is open to the Government to resume the said lands, but any such resumption would require the Government to pay compensation in accordance with LAO-cum-Revenue Divisional Officer v. Mekala Pandu and others.obiter¶447

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Batch of thirteen writ petitions by assignees of DKT pattas (granted around 1999) in Inagaluru Village, Srikalahasti Mandal, whose assignments were cancelled and lands resumed in 2010 (Roc.(A)216/2010, dt.08.04.2010) and 2014 (Roc.A/220/2014, dt.22.10.2014), with possession handed over to APIIC (Roc. C/346/2015, dt.04.07.2015), on the ground of non-cultivation within the first three years of assignment. Held: (i) the claimed service of notices is not accepted — acknowledgments rest on signatures taken on blank sheets, and service by affixture is impermissible unless personal service is first attempted and fails; (ii) following Y.C. Venkata Subbamma (2021:APHC:16895) and the earlier judgments in B. Mani (2011 (1) ALT 334) and G. Munilakshmamma (1999 (1) ALT 617), DKT pattas cannot be cancelled on the mere ground of non-cultivation in the first three years once considerable time has elapsed; the cancellation orders are set aside as violative of law. As to Ac.400.00 already handed to an industrial unit, the Government may resume it only on payment of compensation in accordance with LAO-cum-Revenue Divisional Officer v. Mekala Pandu (2004(2) ALD 451). Writ petitions disposed of, without costs.

¶1

[3206]

¶2

APHC010018352021

¶3

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

¶4

FRIDAY, THE SIXTH DAY OF FEBRUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX

¶5

PRESENT

¶6

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE R RAGHUNANDAN RAO

¶7

WRIT PETITION Nos.: 37624, 38884, 39743, 40515, 44837/2017; 18835 of 2019; 1326, 2173 of 2021; 30632, 31718, 32169, 32188 of 2022 & 19624 of 2024

¶8

WRIT PETITION NO: 37624/2017

¶9

Between:

¶10

SUDDARASI VENKATAMMA, CHITTOOR DIST, W/O. LATE BAKKAIAH, AGED ABOUT 81 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE, R/O. INAGALURU VILLAGE, GOVINDARAOPALLI, SRI KALAHASTHI MANDAL, CHITTOOR DISTRICT.

¶11

...PETITIONER

¶12

AND

¶13

PRL SECRETARY REVENUE DEPT AMARAVATHI 3 OTHERS, REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, REVENUE DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT, VELAGAPUDI, AMARAVATHI, GUNTUR DISTRICT.

¶14

THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR CHITTOOR CHITTOOR DISTRICT, -

¶15

THE REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER TIRUPATHI CHITTOOR DISTRICT, -

¶16

THE TAHSILDAR SRI KALAHASTHI MANDAL CHITTOOR DISTRICT, -

¶17

THE ANDHRA PRADESH INDUSTRIAL INFRASTRUCTURE CORPORATION, HAVING ITS REGISTERED OFFICE AT DOOR NO.5-9-58/B, 6TH FLOOR, PARISRAMA BHAVAN, FATEHMAIDAN ROAD, BASHEERBAGH, HYDERABAD AND CORPORATE OFFICE

¶18

¶19

RRR, J W.P.No.37624 of 2017 & batch

¶20

AT APIIC TOWERS, PLOT NO. CFC-1, IT PARK, MANGALAGIRI, GUNTUR DISTRICT. REPRESENTED BY ITS GENERAL MANAGER (LAW)

¶21

THE ANDHRA PRADESH INDUSTRIAL INFRASTRUCTURE CORPORATION LTD REP BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR, APIIC BUILDING, MANGALAGIRI DIRECTOR, GUNTUR DISTRICT. RR 5 AND 6 ARE IMPLEADED AS PER ORDER OF THIS COURT DT.27.04.2023 VIDE ORDE PASSED IN I.A.NO.1 AND 2 OF 2022

¶22

...RESPONDENT(S):

¶23

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 toto issue an appropriate Writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the proceedings vide Roc.(A)216/2010, dated 08.04.2010 issued by the 4th respondent wherein he has cancelled the Assignment granted in my favour for the land in Sy.No.526/4 to an extent of Ac.1.65 Cents of Inagaluru Village fields, Srikalahasthi Mandal, Chittoor District without issuing any notice and without following due process of law is highly illegal, colorable exercise of power and in utter violation of the principles of natural justice and well established legal principles apart from being violative of fundamental rights guaranteed to me under Articles, 14, 19, 21 and 300-A of the Constitution of India and consequently set aside the proceedings vide Roc.(A)216/2010, dated 08.04.2010 issued by the 4th respondent in so far as the petitioner's land concerned in Sy.No.526/4 to an extent of Ac.1.65 Cents of Inagaluru Village fields, Srikalahasthi Mandal, Chittoor District belong to us and pass

¶24

IA NO: 1 OF 2017(WPMP 46729 OF 2017

¶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 direct the respondents not to disposes the petitioner from the land in Sy.No.526/4 to an extent of Ac.1.65 Cents of Inagaluru Village fields, Srikalahasthi Mandal, Chittoor District by suspending the proceedings in Roc.(A)216/2010, dated 08.04.2010 issued by the 4th respondent in so far as the petitioner's land concerned pending disposal of the above Writ Petition and pass

¶26

¶27

RRR, J W.P.No.37624 of 2017 & batch

¶28

IA NO: 1 OF 2018

¶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 vacate the interim order passed in WPMP No. 46729/2017 in WP No. 37624/2017 dated 09.11.2017.

¶30

IA NO: 1 OF 2022

¶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 pleased to permit the APIIC Ltd., rep by its General Manager to come on record as party Respondent No. 5 in WP No.37624 of 2017 in miscellaneous petitions and pass such other order or orders

¶32

IA NO: 2 OF 2022

¶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 pleased to implead the proposed respondent as respondent No.5 in W.P.No.37624 of 2017 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 Pleased to grant leave to the petitioner herein to file reply affidavit in the above writ petition I.e, WP No. 37624 of 2017 and pass

¶36

Counsel for the Petitioner:

¶37

1.DODDAKA HARSHA VARDHAN

¶38

Counsel for the Respondent(S):

¶39

1.GP FOR ASSIGNMENT (AP)

¶40

2.ADDL ADVOCATE GENERAL (AP)

¶41

3.RAMA CHANDRA RAO GURRAM

¶42

¶43

RRR, J W.P.No.37624 of 2017 & batch

¶44

WRIT PETITION NO: 38884/2017

¶45

Between:

¶46

G.ESWARAMMA, W/O. VENKATARAMANIAH,, OCC: AGRICULTURE, R/O. INAGALURU VILLAGE, SRI KALAHASTHI MANDAL, CHITTOOR DISTRICT

¶47

...PETITIONER

¶48

AND

¶49

THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH REP BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, REVENUE DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT BUILDINGS, HYDERABAD.

¶50

THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR CHITTOOR DISTRICT CHITTOOR, -

¶51

THE TAHSILDAR SRI KALAHASTHI MANDAL CHITTOOR DISTRICT,

¶52

THE ANDHRA PRADESH INDUSTRIAL INFRASTRUCTURE CORPORATION, REP. BY ITS GENERAL MANAGER, CORPORATE OFFICE AT APIIC TOWERS, PLOT NO.CFC-1, MANGALAGIRI, GUNTUR DISTRICT. R4 IS IMPLEADED AS PER COURTS ORDER DT.20.12.2025 IN I.A.NO.1 OF 2022

¶53

...RESPONDENT(S):

¶54

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 toto issue an appropriate Writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the proceedings in Roc.(A)216/2010, dated 08.04.2010 issued by the 3rd respondent wherein the respondent No.3 has cancelled the Assignment granted in petitioenr favour for the land in an extent of Ac.1.44 Cents in Sy.No.526/3 of Inagaluru Village fields, Srikalahasthi Mandal, Chittoor District without issuing any notice and without following due process of law is highly illegal, colourable exercise of power and in utter violation of the principles of natural justice and well established legal principles apart from being violative of fundamental rights guaranteed to petitoner under Articles, 14, 19, 21 and 300-A of the Constitution of India and consequently set aside the proceedings in Roc.(A)216/2010, dated 08.04.2010 issued by the 3rd respondent for the land

¶55

¶56

RRR, J W.P.No.37624 of 2017 & batch

¶57

in an extent of Ac.1.44 Cents in Sy.No.526/3 of Inagaluru Village fields, Srikalahasthi Mandal, Chittoor District belong to petitoner

¶58

IA NO: 1 OF 2017(WPMP 48249 OF 2017

¶59

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 not to disposes the petitoner from the land in an extent of Ac.1.44 Cents in Sy.No.526/3 of Inagaluru Village fields, Srikalahasthi Mandal, Chittoor District by suspending the proceedings in Roc.(A)216/2010, dated 08.04.2010 issued by the 3rd respondent pending disposal of the above Writ Petition

IA NO: 1 OF 2018

IA NO: 1 OF 2022

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 permit the APIIC Ltd., rep by its General Manager to come on record as party Respondent No. 4 in WP No.38884 of 2017 in miscellaneous petitions

¶64

IA NO: 2 OF 2022

¶65

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 vacate the interim order dated 17.11.2017 in WPMP No. 48249 of 2017 in WP.No.38884 of 2017 and pass such

IA NO: 3 OF 2022

RRR, J W.P.No.37624 of 2017 & batch

¶70

IA NO: 1 OF 2024

¶71

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 grant leave to the petitioner herein to file reply affidavit in the above writ petition i.e., W.P No. 38884 of 2017 and pass

¶72

Counsel for the Petitioner:

¶73

1.DODDAKA HARSHA VARDHAN

¶74

Counsel for the Respondent(S):

¶75

1.GP FOR ASSIGNMENT (AP)

¶76

2.ADDL ADVOCATE GENERAL (AP)

¶77

3.RAMA CHANDRA RAO GURRAM

¶78

WRIT PETITION NO: 39743/2017

¶79

Between:

¶80

S.SUBBAMMA,, W/O. RAGAIAH,AGED ABOUT 37 YEARS, 0CC: AGRICULTURE, R/O. INAGALURU VILLAGE, SRI KALAHASTHI MANDAL, CHITTOOR DISTRICT

¶81

...PETITIONER

¶82

AND

¶83

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

¶84

THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, CHITTOOR DISTRICT, CHITTOOR.

¶85

THE TAHSILDAR, SRI KALAHASTHI MANDAL, CHITTOOR DISTRICT

¶86

THE ANDHRA PRADESH INDUSTRIAL INFRASTRUCTURE LTD, REP BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR, APIIC BUILDINGS, MANGALAGIRI, GUNTUR DISTRICT. R4 IS IMPLEADED AS PER ORDER OF THIS COURT DT.27.04.2023 VIDE ORDER PASSED IN I.A.NO. 1 OF 2022.

¶87

...RESPONDENT(S):

¶88

¶89

RRR, J W.P.No.37624 of 2017 & batch

¶90

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 toto issue an appropriate Writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the proceedings in Roc.(A)216/2010, dated 08.04.2010 issued by the 3rd respondent wherein he has cancelled the Assignment granted in favour of the petitioner for the land in an extent of Ac.1.37 Cents in Sy.No.530/2 and Ac.0.11 Cents in Sy.No.530/6 of Inagaluru Village fields, Srikalahasthi Mandal, Chittoor District without issuing any notice and without following due process of law is highly illegal, colourable exercise of power and in utter violation of the principles of natural justice and well established legal principles apart from being .violative of fundamental rights guaranteed to petitioner under Articles, 14, 19, 21 and 300A of the Constitution of India and consequently set aside the proceedings in Roc.(A)216/2010, dated 08.04.2010 issued by the 3rd respondent for the land in an extent of Ac.1.37 Cents in Sy.No.530/2 and Ac.0.11 Cents in Sy.No.530/6 of Inagaluru Village fields, Srikalahasthi Mandal, Chittoor District belong to petitioner and pass

¶91

IA NO: 1 OF 2017(WPMP 49271 OF 2017

¶92

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 not to disposes the petitioner from the land in an extent of Ac.1.37 Cents in Sy.No.530/2 and Ac.0.11 Cents in Sy.No.530/6 of Inagaluru Village fields, Srikalahasthi Mandal, Chittoor District by suspending the proceedings in Roc.(A)216/2010, dated 08.04.2010 issued by the 3rd respondent pending disposal of the above Writ Petition and pass

¶93

IA NO: 1 OF 2018

¶94

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 passed in WPMP..No. 49271/2017 in WP.No. 39743/2017 dated 23.11.2017 and pass

¶95

IA NO: 1 OF 2022

¶96

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 implead the proposed Respondent as Respondent No.4 in the Writ Petition No.39743 of 2017and pass

¶97

¶98

RRR, J W.P.No.37624 of 2017 & batch

¶99

IA NO: 1 OF 2024

¶100

¶101

Counsel for the Petitioner:

¶102

1.DODDAKA HARSHA VARDHAN

¶103

Counsel for the Respondent(S):

¶104

1.GP FOR ASSIGNMENT (AP)

¶105

2.GP FOR REVENUE (AP)

¶106

3.RAMA CHANDRA RAO GURRAM

¶107

WRIT PETITION NO: 40515/2017

¶108

Between:

¶109

VEMULA PRASANNA, W/O. RAMANADHAM, AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE, R/O. ANJANEYAPURAM, INAGALURU VILLAGE, SRI KALAHASTHI MANDAL, CHITTOOR DISTRICT.

¶110

...PETITIONER

¶111

AND

¶112

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

¶113

THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, CHITTOOR DISTRICT, CHITTOOR.

¶114

THE TAHSILDAR, SRI KALAHASTHI MANDAL, CHITTOOR DISTRICT.

¶115

THE ANDHRA PRADESH INDUSTRIAL INFRASTRUCTURE CORPORATION, HAVING ITS REGISTERED OFFICE AT DOOR NO.5-9-58/B, 6TH FLOOR, PARISRAMA BHAVAN, FATEHMAIDAN ROAD, BASHEERBAGH, HYDERABAD AND CORPORATE OFFICE AT APIIC TOWERS, PLOT NO.CFC-1, IT PARK, MANGALAGIRI,

¶116

¶117

RRR, J W.P.No.37624 of 2017 & batch

¶118

GUNTUR DISTRICT. REP BY ITS GENERAL MANAGER(LAW)

¶119

THE ANDHRA PRADESH INDUSTRIAL INFRASTRUCTURE CORPORATION LTD, REP BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR, APIIC BUILDING, MANGALAGIRI, GUNTUR DISTRICT. RR 4 AND 5 ARE IMPLEADED AS PER ORDER OF THIS COURT DT.27.04.2023 VIDE ORDER PASSED IN I.A.NO.1 AND 3 OF 2022.

¶120

...RESPONDENT(S):

¶121

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 toto issue an appropriate writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the proceedings in Roc.(A)/216/2010, dated 08.04.2010 issued by the 3rd respondent wherein he has cancelled the Assignment granted in petitioner favour for the land in an extent of Ac.1.00 Cents in Sy.No. 483/20 and Ac.0.04 Cents in Sy.No. 483/15 of Inagaluru village fields, Srikalahasthi mandal, Chittoor District without issuing any notice and without following due process of law is highly illegal, colourable exercise of power and in utter violation of the principles of natural justice and well established legal principles apart from being violative of fundamental rights guaranteed to petitioner under Article 14, 19, 21 and 300-A of the constitution of India and consequently set aside the proceedings in Roc.(A)/216/2010, dated 08.04.2010 isued by the 3rd respondent for the land in an extent of Ac.1.00 cents in Sy.No. 483/20 and Ac.0.04 Cents in Sy.No.483/15 of Inagaluru village fields, Srikalahasthi mandal, Chittoor district belong to petitioner.

¶122

IA NO: 1 OF 2017(WPMP 50296 OF 2017

¶123

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 petitioner from the land in an extent of Ac.1.00 Cents in Sy.No. 483/20 and Ac.0.04 Cents in Sy.No. 483/15 of Inagaluru village fields, Srikalahasthi mandal, Chittoor District by suspending the proceedings in Roc.(A)/216/2010, dated 08.04.2010 isued by the 3rd respondent pending disposal of the above writ petition.

¶124

IA NO: 1 OF 2018

¶125

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

¶126

¶127

RRR, J W.P.No.37624 of 2017 & batch

¶128

vacate the interim orders passed in WPMP NO. 50296/2017 in WP No. 40515/2017 dated 04.12.2017

¶129

IA NO: 1 OF 2022

¶130

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 permit the APIIC Ltd., rep by its General Manager to come on record as party Respondent No. 4 in WP No.40515 of 2017 in miscellaneous petitions

¶131

IA NO: 2 OF 2022

¶132

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 vacate the interim order dated 04.12.2017 in WPMP No. 50296 of 2017 in WP.No.40515 of 2017 and pass such

¶133

IA NO: 3 OF 2022

¶134

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 permit the petitioner to implead the proposed respondent No.4 as the party respondent in W.P No. 40515 of 2017 and pass

¶135

IA NO: 1 OF 2024

¶136

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 may be pleased to grant leave to the petitioner herein to file reply affidavit in the above writ petition i.e., W.P No. 40515 of 2017 and pas

¶137

Counsel for the Petitioner:

¶138

1.DODDAKA HARSHA VARDHAN

¶139

Counsel for the Respondent(S):

¶140

1.GP FOR ASSIGNMENT (AP)

¶141

2.ADDL ADVOCATE GENERAL (AP)

¶142

3.RAMA CHANDRA RAO GURRAM

¶143

¶144

RRR, J W.P.No.37624 of 2017 & batch

¶145

WRIT PETITION NO: 44837/2017

¶146

Between:

¶147

P SHANKARAIAH DIED, S/O.GURAVIAH, AGED ABOUT 68 YEARS, OCC AGRICULTURE, R/O. INAGULURU VILLAGE, SRI KALAHASTHI MANDAL, CHITTOOR DISTRICT

¶148

E. ADEMMA,, W/O. LATE P. SANKARIAH AGED ABOUT 66 YEARS, R/O. POLI VILLAGE, SRIKALAHASTI MANDAL, TIRUPATI DISTRICT.

¶149

P. DHARMAIAH,, S/O. LATE P. SANKARIAH, AGED ABOUT 52 YEARS, R/O POLI VILLAGE, SRIKALAHASTI MANDAL, TIRUPATI DISTRICT.

¶150

P. SARASWATHI,, W/O. PENCHALAIAH, AGED ABOUT 49 YEARS, R/O. D.NO. 5/32, 1ST STREET, MOTHI NAGAR, KARAMBAKAM, CHENNAI, TAMILNADU- 600118 PETITIONERS 2 TO 4 ARE BROUGHT ON RECORD AS PER LRS OF DECEASED SOLE PETITIONER AS PER COURTS ORDER DT.20.12.2025 IN IA 1 OF 2025

¶151

...PETITIONER(S)

¶152

AND

¶153

STATE OF AP, REP., BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, REVENUE DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT BUILDINGS, VELAGAPUDI, AMARAVATHI GUNTUR DISTRICT.

¶154

THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, CHITTOOR DISTRICT, CHITTOOR.

¶155

THE TAHSILDAR, SRI KALAHASTHI MANDAL, CHITTOOR DISTRICT

¶156

ANDHRA PRADESH INDUSTRIAL INFRASTRUCTURE CORPORATION, HAVING ITS REGISTERED OFFICE AT PROPOSED RESPONDENT NO.4 NO.5-9-58/B, 6TH FLOOR, PARISRAMA BHAVAN, FATEHMAIDAN ROAD, BASHEERBAGH, HYDERABAD AND CORPORATE OFFICE AT APIIC TOWERS, PLOT NO.CFC-1, IT PARK, MANGALAGIRI, GUNTUR DISTRICT REP BY ITS GENERAL MANAGER (LAW). R4 IS IMPLEADED AS PER COURTS ORDER DT.02.09.2025 IN IA 1 OF 2022

¶157

¶158

RRR, J W.P.No.37624 of 2017 & batch

¶159

...RESPONDENT(S):

¶160

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 toto issue an appropriate Writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the highhanded action of the respondents No.3 in interfering with petitioner rights over the land in an extent of Ac.1.00 Cents in Sy.No.483/8 and Ac.0.09 Cents in Sy.No.483/12 of Inagaluru Village fields, Srikalahasthi Mandal, Chittoor District eventhough the assignment granted in petitiner favour through the proceedings No.298/4/1408, dated 06-01-1999 is very much in subsistence is highly illegal, colorable exercise of power and in utter violation of the principles of natural justice and well established legal principles apart from being violative of fundamental rights guaranteed to petitioner under Articles, 14, 19, 21 and 300-A of the Constitution of India and consequently direct the respondents No.3 not to interfere with petitioner rights over the land in an extent of Ac.1.00 Cents in Sy.No.483/8 and Ac.0.09 Cents in Sy.No.483/12 of Inagaluru Village fields, Srikalahasthi Mandal, Chittoor District belong to petitioner and pass

¶161

IA NO: 1 OF 2017

¶162

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

¶163

IA NO: 2 OF 2017

¶164

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 No.3 not to interfere with petitioner peacefull possession and enjoyment over the land in an extent of Ac.1.00 Cents in Sy.No.483/8 and Ac.0.09 Cents in Sy.No.483/12 of Inagaluru Village fields, Srikalahasthi Mandal, Chittoor District, pending disposal of the above Writ Petition and pass

¶165

IA NO: 1 OF 2018

¶166

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 orders dated 28.12.2017 in IA No. 2/2017 in WP No.44837/2017 and dismiss

¶167

¶168

RRR, J W.P.No.37624 of 2017 & batch

¶169

IA NO: 1 OF 2022

¶170

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 permit the APIIC Ltd., rep by its General Manager to come on record as party Respondent No. 4 in WP No.44837 of 2017 in miscellaneous petitions and pass such other order or orders

¶171

IA NO: 2 OF 2022

¶172

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 vacate the interim order dated 28.12..2017 in I.A. No. 2 of 2017 in WP.No.44837 of 2017 and pass such

¶173

IA NO: 1 OF 2025

¶174

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 may be pleased to permit the proposed petitioner Nos. 2 to 4 to come on record as the legal representatives of the 1st writ petitioner in the writ petition and also other interlocutory applications and to pas

¶175

Counsel for the Petitioner(S):

¶176

1.M DELHI BABU

¶177

2.DODDAKA HARSHA VARDHAN

¶178

Counsel for the Respondent(S):

¶179

1.ADDL ADVOCATE GENERAL (AP)

¶180

2.RAMA CHANDRA RAO GURRAM

¶181

WRIT PETITION NO: 18835/2019

¶182

Between:

¶183

SMT. S.SUBBAMMA,, W/O RAGAIAH, AGED ABOUT 30 YEARS, OCCAGRICULTURE, R/O GOVINDARAOPALLE VILLAGE, INAGALUR POST SRIKALAHASTI MANDAL, CHITTOOR DISTRICT.

¶184

SMT. S.VENKATAMMA,, W/O LATE BAKKAIAH, AGED ABOUT 83 YEARS, OCC- AGRICULTURE, R/O GOVINDARAOPALLE VILLAGE,

¶185

¶186

RRR, J

¶187

W.P.No.37624 of 2017 & batch

¶188

INAGALUR POST, SRIKALAHASTI MANDAL, CHITTOOR DISTRICT.

¶189

G.ESWARAMMA,, W/O VENKATA RAMANAIAH, AGED ABOUT 46 YEARS, OCC- AGRICULTURE, R/O GOVINDARAOPALLE VILLAG6, INAGALUR POST SRIKALAHASTI MANDAL, CHITTOOR DISTRICT.

¶190

...PETITIONER(S)

¶191

AND

¶192

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

¶193

THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, CHITTOOR DISTRICT, CHITTOOR.

¶194

THE REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER, TIRUPATI, CHITTOOR DISTRICT.

¶195

THE TAHSILDAR, SRIKALAHASTI MANDAL, CHITTOOR DISTRICT.

¶196

THE ANDHRA PRADESH INDUSTRIAL INFRASTRUCTURE CORPORATION LTD, REP. BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR, APIIC BUILDING. MANGALAGIRI, GUNTUR DISTRI R5 IS IMPLEADED AS PER COURTS ORDER DT.20.12.2025 IN I.A.NO.1 OF 2022

¶197

...RESPONDENT(S):

¶198

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 writ, order or orders more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandatnus declaring the action of the respondents in trying to dispossess the petitioner's from their agriculture lands to an extent of Ac.1.37 cents in Sy.No.530/2, Ac.0.11 cents in Sy.No.530/6, Ac.1.65 cents in Sy.No.526/4 and Ac.1.44 cents in Sy.No.526/3 respectively situated at Inagaluru Village fields, Srikalahasti Mandal, Chittoor District without initiating any land acquisition proceedings under the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013 is illegal, arbitrary, unconstitutional and violation of principles of natural justice and also in violation of Articles 14 and 300-A of the Constitution of India and consequently direct the respondents to not to dispossess the petitioners from their respective lands without paying compensation to the petitioners under Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013

¶199

¶200

RRR, J W.P.No.37624 of 2017 & batch

¶201

IA NO: 1 OF 2019

¶202

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 not to dispossess petitioners' from their land to an extent of Ac.1.37 cents in Sy.No.530/2, Ac.0.11 cents in Sy.No.530/6, Ac.1.65 cents in Sy.No.526/4 and Ac.1.44 cents in Sy.No.526/3 respectively situated at Inagaluru Village fields, Srikalahasti Mandal, Chittoor District, without paying compensation to the petitioners under Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitelon and Resettlement Act, 2013 pending disposal of the above writ petition

¶203

IA NO: 1 OF 2022

¶204

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 permit the petitioner to implead the proposed respondent No.5 as the party in I.A.No.1 of 2019 in W.P.No.18835of 2019and W.P No. 18835 of 2019 and pass

¶205

Counsel for the Petitioner(S):

¶206

1.DODDAKA HARSHA VARDHAN

¶207

Counsel for the Respondent(S):

¶208

1.GP FOR REVENUE (AP)

¶209

2.G P FOR ASSIGNMENT

¶210

WRIT PETITION NO: 1326/2021

¶211

Between:

¶212

VENDI REDDAMMA, W/O. V.YELLAPPA, AGED ABOUT 60 YEARS, OCC. AGRICULTURAL FARMER, R/O. H.NO.3/P61/1,VAMPALLI VILLAGE, POLI POST, SRIKALAHASTI MANDAL, CHITTOOR DISTRICT, ANDHRA PRADESH.

¶213

...PETITIONER

¶214

AND

¶215

STATE OF AP, REP BY ITS SECRETARY, REVENUE DEPARTMENT,

¶216

¶217

RRR, J W.P.No.37624 of 2017 & batch

¶218

SECRETARIAT, VELAGAPUDI AT AMARAVATI, ANDHRA PRADESH

¶219

THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, CHITTOOR DISTRICT, CHITTOOR, A.P.

¶220

THE REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER, REVENUE DIVISION TIRUPATI, CHITTOOR DISTRICT, A.P.

¶221

THE TAHSILDHAR, SRIKALAHASTI MANDAL, SRIKALAHASTI,CHITTOOR DISTRICT, A.P.

¶222

THE ZONAL MANAGER A P I I C, RAYALASEEMA ZONE, TIRUPATI, CHITTOOR DISTRICT, A.P.

¶223

...RESPONDENT(S):

¶224

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 toto issue a writ of mandamus or order declaring the action of the respondents 4 and 5 in trying to evict the petitioner following due process of law on a fabricated document and without paying compensation and without any notice is illegal, arbitrary and violative of the principles of natural justice and further direct the respondents no.4, 5 and their agents not to disposes me from the land situated in survey No. 483/14 for an extent of Ac. 0.06 Cents bounded with. North. Sy.No. 483/13, belongs to T. Kannaiah, East Sy.No.458, West. Sy.No. 484, South. 483-15 belongs to V. Prasanna and survey no. 483/19 for an extent of Ac.1.00 cents bounded with. North. 483-18 belongs to B. Sarojanamma, East. Sy.No.458, West. Sy.No. 484, South. 483-20 belongs to V. Prasanna and pass

¶225

IA NO: 1 OF 2021

¶226

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 respondent not to evict the petitioner from the land situated in survey No. 483/14 for an extent of Ac. 0.06 Cents bounded with: North: Sy.No. 483/13, belongs to T. Kannaiah, East Sy.No.458, West: Sy.No. 484, South: 483-15 belongs to V. Prasanna and survey no. 483/19 for an extent of Ac.1.00 cents bounded with: North: 483-18 belongs to B. Sarojanamma, East: Sy.No.458, West: Sy.No. 484, South: 483-20 belongs to V. Prasanna pneidng disposal of the main writ petition, and pass

¶227

¶228

RRR, J W.P.No.37624 of 2017 & batch

¶229

IA NO: 2 OF 2021

¶230

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 vacate the interim orders granted on 03-02-2021 in WP.No.1326/2021 and dismiss the writ petition

¶231

IA NO: 1 OF 2022

¶232

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 vacate the interim order dated 03.02.2021 in IA No.1 of 2021 in WP. No.1326 of 2021 and pass

¶233

Counsel for the Petitioner:

¶234

1.VISWANATH N

¶235

Counsel for the Respondent(S):

¶236

1.ADDL ADVOCATE GENERAL (AP)

¶237

2.RAMA CHANDRA RAO GURRAM

¶238

WRIT PETITION NO: 2173/2021

¶239

Between:

¶240

P. KRISHNA VENI, W/O. P.SANKARAIAH, AGE 48 ADDRESS R/O. VAMPALLI VILLAGE, POLI POST, SRIKALAHASTI MANDAL, CHITTOOR DISTRICT, ANDHRA PRADESH.

¶241

...PETITIONER

¶242

AND

¶243

THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP BY ITS SECRETARY, REVENUE ADDRESS DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT, VELAGAPUDI AT AMARAVATI, ANDHRA PRADESH.

¶244

THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, ADDRESS CHITTOOR DISTRICT, CHITTOOR, A.P.

¶245

THE REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER, ADDRESS REVENUE DIVISION TIRUPATI, CHITTOOR DISTRICT,A.P.

¶246

¶247

RRR, J W.P.No.37624 of 2017 & batch

¶248

THE TAHSILDHAR, ADDRESS SRIKALAHASTI MANDAL, SRIKALAHASTI,CHITTOOR DISTRICT,A.P.

¶249

THEZONAL MANAGERA P I I C, ADDRESS RAYALASEEMA ZONE, TIRUPATI, CHITTOOR DISTRICT,A.P.

¶250

...RESPONDENT(S):

¶251

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 of mandamus or order declaring the action of the respondents 4 and 5 in trying to evict petitioner without following due process of law is illegal, arbitrary and violative of the natural principles of justice and further direct the respondents no. 4, 5 and their agents not to disposes me from the land situated in survey no. 526/5 for an extent of Ac. 1.65 cents bounded with Nort Sy.No. 526/4, belongs, East Sy.No.495, West Sy.No. 526, South Sy.No. 527 without following due process of law and pass

¶252

IA NO: 1 OF 2021

¶253

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 not to evict me from the land situated in survey No. 526/5 for an extent of Ac. 1.65 cents bounded with: North: Sy.No. 526/4, belongs, East Sy.No.495, West: Sy.No. 526, South: Sy.No. 527 without following due process of law pending disposal of this main writ petition and pass

¶254

IA NO: 2 OF 2021

¶255

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 vacate the interim orders dt: 04-02-2021 in WP.No.2173/2021 and dismiss the writ petition and pass

¶256

IA NO: 1 OF 2024

¶257

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 receive the Reply Affidavit for the Counter Affidavit filed by the 4th Respondent by allowing the leave petition in the above writ petition

¶258

¶259

RRR, J W.P.No.37624 of 2017 & batch

¶260

IA NO: 2 OF 2024

¶261

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 receive the Reply Affidavit for the Counter Affidavit filed by the 5th Respondent by allowing the leave petition in the above writ petition

¶262

Counsel for the Petitioner:

¶263

1.VISWANATH N

¶264

Counsel for the Respondent(S):

¶265

1.ADDL ADVOCATE GENERAL (AP)

¶266

2.RAMA CHANDRA RAO GURRAM

¶267

WRIT PETITION NO: 30632/2022

¶268

Between:

¶269

VENDI REDDAMMA, W/O. V.YELLAPPA, AGED ABOUT 61 YEARS, OCC AGRICULTURAL FARMER, R/O. H.NO. 3/P61/1, VAMPALLI VILLAGE, POLI POST, SRIKALAHASTI MANDAL, CHITTOOR DISTRICT, NOW TIRUPATI DISTRICT.

¶270

...PETITIONER

¶271

AND

¶272

THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP. BY ITS SECRETARY, REVENUE DEPARTMENT, SECRATARIAT, VELAGAPUDI AT AMARAVATI.

¶273

THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, CHITTOOR DISTRICT, NOW TIRUPATI DISTRICT

¶274

THE REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER, SRIKALAHASTI, CHITTOOR DISTRICT, NOW TIRUPATI DISTRICT .

¶275

THE TAHSILDAR, SRIKALAHASTI MANDAL, SRIKALAHASTI, CHITTOOR DISTRICT, NOW TIRUPATI DISTRICT.

¶276

THE ZONAL MANAGER A P I I C LTD, RAYALASEEMA ZONE, TIRUPATI, CHITTOOR DISTRICT, NOW TIRUPATI DISTRICT.

¶277

¶278

RRR, J W.P.No.37624 of 2017 & batch

¶279

...RESPONDENT(S):

¶280

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 writ, order or orders more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the proceedings in Roc.(A) 216/2010, dated 08.04.2010 issued by the 4th respondent, cancelling the assignment patta granted in favour of the petitioner and consequential proceedings in Roc. C/346/2015, Dated 04.07.2015, handing over the possession to the 5th respondent in respect of the land to an extnet of Ac.0.06 Cents in Sy. No. 483/14 and to an extent of Ac. 1.00 cents in Sy.No. 483/19 situated at Inagaluru Village, Srikalahasti Mandal, Chittoor District, Now Tirupati District, without issuing any notice and without following due process of law as highly illegal, arbitrary, colorable exercise power and in utter violation of priciples of natural justices and well established legal priciples apart from being violative of fundamental rights granted to petitioner under articles 14, 19, 21 and 300A of the constitution of India, set aside the same and consequently direct the respondents not to interfere with the petitioner land to an extnet of Ac.0.06 Cents in Sy. No. 483/14 and to an extent of Ac. 1.00 cents in Sy.No. 483/19 situated at Inagaluru Village, Srikalahasti Mandal, Chittoor District, Now Tirupati District and to pass

¶281

IA NO: 1 OF 2022

¶282

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 not to dispossess the petitioner from the land to an extent of Ac.0.06 Cents in Sy. No. 483/14 and to an extent of Ac. 1.00 cents in Sy.No. 483/19 situated at Inagaluru Village, Srikalahasti Mandal, Chittoor District, Now Tirupati District by suspending the procedings in Roc.(A) 216/2010, dated: 08.04.2010 and consequential proceedings in Roc. C/346/2015, Dated: 04.07.2015 of the 4th respondent in respect of the above land pending disposal of the above writ petition and to pass

¶283

IA NO: 1 OF 2023

¶284

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 prayed to vacate the interim order dt.17.10.2022 vide I.A.No.1 of 2022 in W.P.No.30632 of 2022 and also prayed to dismiss the writ petition and pass

¶285

¶286

RRR, J W.P.No.37624 of 2017 & batch

IA NO: 1 OF 2024

IA NO: 1 OF 2025

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 receive the counter copies on record by allowing the leave petition in the above writ petition and pass

¶291

IA NO: 2 OF 2025

¶292

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 may be pleased to vacate the interim order dated 17.10.2022in WP 30632 of 2022 and pas

¶293

Counsel for the Petitioner:

¶294

1.N ASWARTHA NARAYANA

¶295

Counsel for the Respondent(S):

¶296

1.GP FOR REVENUE

¶297

2.RAMA CHANDRA RAO GURRAM

¶298

WRIT PETITION NO: 31718/2022

¶299

Between:

¶300

POLI SANKARIAH ( DIED) AS PER L.RS P2 TO P4, S/O. GURAVIAH, AGED ABOUT 73 YEARS, OCC AGRICULTURE, R/O. INAGALURU VILLAGE, SRIKALAHASTI MANDAL, CHITTOOR DISTRICT, NOW TIRUPATI DISTRICT.

¶301

E.ADEMMA, W/O LATE P.SANKARIAH, AGED ABOUT 66 YEARS, R/O POLI VILLAGE, SRIKALAHASTI MANDAL, TIRUPATHI DISTRICT.

¶302

P.DHARMAIAH, S/O LATE P.SANKARIAH,, AGED ABOUT 52 YEARS,

¶303

¶304

RRR, J W.P.No.37624 of 2017 & batch

¶305

R/O POLI VILLAGE, SRIKALAHASTI MANDAL, TIRUPATHI DISTRICT.

¶306

P.SARASWATHI, W/O PENCHALAIAH,, AGED ABOUT 49 YEARS, R/O D.NO.5/32, 1ST STREET, MOTHI NAGAR, KARAMBAKAM, CHENNAI, TAMILNADU -600 118. PETITIONER NOS. 2 TO 4 ARE BROUGHT ON RECORD AS L.RS OF THE DECEASED 1ST WRIT PETITIONER AS PER THE COURT'S ORDER DT.20.12.2025 IN I.A.NO.01 OF 2025

¶307

...PETITIONER(S)

¶308

AND

¶309

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

¶310

THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, CHITTOOR DISTRICT, NOW TIRUPATI DISTRICT.

¶311

THE REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER, SRIKALAHASTI REVENUE DIVISION, CHITTOOR DISTRICT, NOW TIRUPATI DISTRICT.

¶312

THE TAHSILDAR, SRIKALAHASTI MANDAL, SRIKALAHASTI, CHITTOOR DISTRICT, NOW TIRUPATI DISTRICT.

¶313

THE ZONAL MANAGER A P I I C LTD, RAYALASEEMA ZONE, TIRUPATI, CHITTOOR DISTRICT, NOW TIRUPATI DISTRICT.

¶314

...RESPONDENT(S):

¶315

¶316

¶317

RRR, J W.P.No.37624 of 2017 & batch

¶318

established legal principles apart from being violative of fundamental rights granted to petitioner under articles 14, 19, 21 and 300A of the constitution of India, set aside the same and consequently direct the respondents not to interfere with the petitioner's land to an extnet of Ac.1.00 Cents in Sy. No. 483-8 and to an extent of Ac. 0.09 cents in Sy.No. 483-12 situated at Inagaluru Village, Srikalahasti Mandal, Chittoor District, Now Tirupati District and to pass

¶319

IA NO: 1 OF 2022

¶320

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 stay of all further procedings pursuant to the impugned order in Roc.A/220/2014, dated: 20.10.2014 and consequential proceedings in Roc. C/346/2015, Dated: 04.07.2015 of the 4th respondent in respect of the petitioner's land to an extnet of Ac.1.00 Cents in Sy. No. 483/8 and to an extent of Ac. 0.09 cents in Sy.No. 483/12 situated at Inagaluru Village, Srikalahasti Mandal, Chittor District, Now Tirupati District pending disposal of the above writ petition and to pass

IA NO: 1 OF 2024

IA NO: 2 OF 2024

IA NO: 3 OF 2024

IA NO: 1 OF 2025

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

¶329

¶330

RRR, J W.P.No.37624 of 2017 & batch

¶331

may be pleased to permit the proposed petitioner Nos. 2 to 4 to come on record as the legal representatives of the 1st writ petitioner in the writ petition and also other interlocutory applications and to pass

¶332

Counsel for the Petitioner(S):

¶333

1.M DELHI BABU

¶334

2.DODDAKA HARSHA VARDHAN

¶335

Counsel for the Respondent(S):

¶336

1.GP FOR REVENUE

¶337

WRIT PETITION NO: 32169/2022

¶338

Between:

¶339

S. MANOHAR, , S/O. CHALAPATHI, AGED ABOUT 44 YEARS, R/O. INAGALURU VILLAGE, SRIKALAHASTI MANDAL, CHITTOOR DISTRICT, NOW TIRUPATI DISTRICT.

¶340

...PETITIONER

¶341

AND

¶342

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

¶343

THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, CHITTOOR DISTRICT, NOW TIRUPATI DISTRICT.

¶344

THE REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER, SRIKALAHASTI REVENUE DIVISION, CHITTOOR DISTRICT, NOW TIRUPATI DISTRICT.

¶345

THE TAHSILDAR, SRIKALAHASTI MANDAL, SRIKALAHASTI, CHITTOOR DISTRICT, NOW TIRUPATI DISTRICT.

¶346

THE ZONAL MANAGER, A.P.I.I.C. LTD., RAYALASEEMA ZONE, TIRUPATI, CHITTOOR DISTRICT, NOW TIRUPATI DISTRICT.

¶347

...RESPONDENT(S):

¶348

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

¶349

¶350

RRR, J

¶351

W.P.No.37624 of 2017 & batch

¶352

pleased topleased to issue writ, order or orders more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the proceedings in Roc.(A) 216/2010, dated- 08.04.2010 issued by the 4th respondent, cancelling the assignment patta granted in favour of the ' petitioner and consequential proceedings in Roc. C/346/2015, Dated- 04.07.2015, handing over the possession to the 5th respondent in respect of the land to an extent of Ac.1.65 Cents in Sy. No. 526/1 situated at Inagaluru Village, Srikalahasti Mandal, Chittoor District, without issuing any notice as highly illegal, arbitrary, colorable exercise power and in utter violation of principles of natural justices and well established legal principles apart from being violative of fundamental rights granted to petitioner under articles 14, 19, 21 and 300A of the constitution of India, set aside the same and consequently direct the respondents not to interfere with the petitioner's land to an extent of Ac.1.65 Cents in Sy. No. 526/1 situated at Inagaluru Village, Srikalahasti Mandal, Chittoor District and pass

¶353

IA NO: 1 OF 2022

¶354

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 not to dispossess the petitioner from the land to an extent of Ac.1.65 Cents in Sy. No. 526/1 situated at Inagaluru Village, Srikalahasti Mandal, Chittoor District, Now Tirupati District by suspending the procedings in Roc.(A) 216/2010, dated- 08.04.2010 and consequential proceedings in Roc. C/346/2015, Dated- 04.07.2015 of the 4th respondent in respect of the above land pending disposal of the • above writ petition and to pass

IA NO: 1 OF 2024

IA NO: 1 OF 2025

RRR, J W.P.No.37624 of 2017 & batch

¶361

IA NO: 2 OF 2025

¶362

¶363

Counsel for the Petitioner:

¶364

1.DODDAKA HARSHA VARDHAN

¶365

Counsel for the Respondent(S):

¶366

1.GP FOR REVENUE

¶367

2.RAMA CHANDRA RAO GURRAM

¶368

WRIT PETITION NO: 32188/2022

¶369

Between:

¶370

SUDDARASI RAVIBABU,, S/O. LATE PANDAIAH, AGED ABOUT 42 YEARS,R/O. INAGALURU VILLAGE, SRIKALAHASTI MANDAL, CHITTOOR DISTRICT, NOW TIRUPATI DISTRICT.

¶371

...PETITIONER

¶372

AND

¶373

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

¶374

THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, CHITTOOR DISTRICT, NOW TIRUPATI DISTRICT.

¶375

THE REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER, SRIKALAHASTI REVENUE DIVISION, CHITTOOR DISTRICT, NOW TIRUPATI DISTRICT.

¶376

THE TAHSILDAR, SRIKALAHASTI MANDAL, SRIKALAHASTI, CHITTOOR DISTRICT, NOW TIRUPATI DISTRICT.

¶377

THE ZONAL MANAGER, A.P.I.I.C. LTD., RAYALASEEMA ZONE, TIRUPATI, CHITTOOR DISTRICT, NOW TIRUPATI DISTRICT.

¶378

...RESPONDENT(S):

¶379

¶380

RRR, J W.P.No.37624 of 2017 & batch

¶381

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 writ, order or orders more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the proceedings in Roc.A/220/2014, dated22.10.2014 issued by the 4th respondent, cancelling the assignment patta granted in favour of the petitioner and consequential proceedings in Roc. C/346/2015, Dated04.07.2015, handing over the possession to the 5m respondent in respect of the land to an extnet of Ac. 0.87 Cents in Sy. No. 528-4 situated at Inagaluru Village, Srikalahasti Mandal, Chittoor District without issuing any notice to the petitioner as highly illegal, arbitrary, colorable exercise power and in utter violation of principles of natural justices and well established legal principles apart from being violative of fundamental rights granted to petitioner under articles 14, 19, 21 and 300A of the constitution of India, set aside the same and consequently direct the respondents not to interfere with the petitioner's land to an extnet of Ac. 0.87 Cents in Sy. No. 528-4 situated at Inagaluru Village, Srikalahasti Mandal, Chittoor District and to pass

¶382

IA NO: 1 OF 2022

¶383

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 not to dispossess the petitioner from the land to an extnet of Ac. 0.87 Cents in Sy. No. 528-4 situated at Inagaluru Village, Srikalahasti Mandal, Chittoor District by suspending the procedings in Roc.A/220/2014, dated: 22.10.2014 and consequential proceedings in Roc. C/346/2015, Dated: 04.07.2015 of the 4th respondent in respect of the above land pending disposal of the above writ petition and to pass

¶384

IA NO: 1 OF 2024

¶385

¶386

Counsel for the Petitioner:

¶387

1.DODDAKA HARSHA VARDHAN

¶388

¶389

RRR, J W.P.No.37624 of 2017 & batch

¶390

Counsel for the Respondent(S):

¶391

1.GP FOR REVENUE

¶392

2.RAMA CHANDRA RAO GURRAM

¶393

WRIT PETITION NO: 19624/2024

¶394

Between:

¶395

P KRISHNA VENI, W/O. P. SANKARAIAH, AGED ABOUT 52 YEARS, R/O. VAMPALLI VILLAGE, POLL POST, SRIKALAHASTI MANDAL, CHITTOOR DISTRICT, NOW TIRUPATI DISTRICT.

¶396

...PETITIONER

¶397

AND

¶398

THE STATE OF AP, REP. BY ITS SECRETARY. REVENUE DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT, VELAGAPUDI AT AMARAVATI.

¶399

THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, CHITTOOR DISTRICT, NOW TIRUPATI DISTRICT

¶400

THE REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER, SRIKALAHASTI, CHITTOOR DISTRICT, NOW TIRUPATI DISTRICT.

¶401

THE TAHSILDAR, SRIKALAHASTI MANDAL, SRIKALAHASTI, CHITTOOR DISTRICT, NOW TIRUPATI DISTRICT.

¶402

THE ZONAL MANAGER A P I I C LTD, RAYALASEEMA ZONE, TIRUPATI, CHITTOOR DISTRICT, NOW TIRUPATI DISTRICT.

¶403

...RESPONDENT(S):

RRR, J

W.P.No.37624 of 2017 & batch

¶408

principles apart from being violative of fundamental rights granted to petitioner under articles 14, 19, 21 and 300A of the constitution of India, set aside the same and consequently direct the respondents not to interfere with the petitioner's land to an extnet of Ac. 1.65 Cents in Sy. No. 526/5, situated at Inagaluru Village, Srikalahasti Mandal, Chittoor District, Now Tirupati District and to pass

¶409

IA NO: 1 OF 2024

¶410

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 not to dispossess the petitioner from the land to an extent of Ac. 1.65 Cents in Sy. No. 526/5, situated at Inagaluru Village, Srikalahasti Mandal, Chittoor District, Now Tirupati District by suspending the procedings in Roc.(A) 216/2010, dated: 08.04.2010, issued by the 4 TH respondent pending disposal of the above writ petition and to pass

¶411

Counsel for the Petitioner:

¶412

1.DODDAKA HARSHA VARDHAN

¶413

Counsel for the Respondent(S):

¶414

1.GP FOR REVENUE

¶415

2.RAMA CHANDRA RAO GURRAM

¶416

¶417

RRR, J

¶418

W.P.No.37624 of 2017 & batch

¶419

¶420

RRR, J W.P.No.37624 of 2017 & batch

¶421

The Court made the following Common Order:

¶422

As the issues raised in the present Writ Petitions relate to the same parcel of land and raise a similar question of fact and law, they are being disposed of, by way of this common order.

¶423

The petitioners, in all these cases, are persons to whom lands had been assigned, by way of DKT pattas in various survey numbers of Inagalur Village, Srikalahasti Mandal, Chittoor District. These assignments were done in and around the year 1999.

¶424

The petitioners in all these cases, who had been assigned lands, have approached this Court, with the contention that the respondent authorities have forcefully tried to evict the petitioners from these lands in order to hand over the same to Ms. APIIC. The petitioners contend that they are still in possession of these lands and their possession is protected by the Interlocutory Orders passed by this Court.

¶425

The respondent authorities, in their counter affidavits, submit that the assignment of lands, made to the petitioners herein, was cancelled and the lands were resumed in the years 2010 and 2014 itself. This resumption is said to have been made on the ground that the petitioners had not brought the lands into cultivation within the first three years of assignment and violation of this requirement, entitles the respondent Authorities to resume the lands.

¶426

¶427

RRR, J W.P.No.37624 of 2017 & batch

¶428

The learned counsels for the petitioners, on the other hand, contend that none of the petitioners have received any kind of notice regarding the alleged resumption of land and that the petitioners continue to remain in possession of the lands and their possession of agricultural activities over their lands is reflected in the revenue records in the form of Adangals and that the R.O.R. Records show that the petitioners continue to be the owners of the land even in the years 2017-18 as well as 2020-21 in some cases.

¶429

The learned counsels for the petitioners herein have also produced the said revenue records to show that the authorities continue to recognize the petitioners herein as owners of the land which had been assigned to them.

¶430

The counter affidavits filed by the respondent authorities’ state that notices had been issued to the petitioners calling upon them to showcause why the lands should not be resumed on the ground of non-cultivation of the lands within the first three years of resumption and that the petitioners did not offer any explanation after receipt of these notices. The respondent authorities also state that the orders were served on the petitioners by affixture of the same on the land of the petitioners.

¶431

The learned counsels for the petitioners have drawn the attention of this Court to some of the copies of the notices which have been filed along with the counter affidavits. The copies of the notices in W.P.No.1326 of 2021 can be taken up as one such example. A perusal of these notices would show

¶432

¶433

RRR, J W.P.No.37624 of 2017 & batch

¶434

that the notice is on one sheet and the acknowledgment of these notices is on a blank sheet, which is attached to this notice. The petitioner, in W.P.No.1326 of 2021, contends that she had been approached, in the year 2019, with the offer of acquisition of the land and payment of compensation. At that stage, her signature was taken on a blank sheet and the same is now pressed into service to claim that she has acknowledged the receipt of this notice in the year 2010.

¶435

The manner in which the signature is affixed on a blank sheet and the said blank sheet is attached to the notice raises any amount of doubt as to the credibility of the claim of the respondent authorities that such notices had been served on the petitioners in the year 2010. Further, the respondents having taken the stand that notices had been served personally on the petitioners, have been silent as to why the order copies were not served personally on the petitioners and were affixed to the lands. Though such affixture is one of the modes of service of notice, under the Rules, any such affixture would have to be done only after normal service of notice is attempted as such affixtures can never be demonstrated nor can such affixtures be accepted unless notices could not be served personally on the affected persons.

¶436

For all the aforesaid reasons, this Court is not willing to accept the contentions of the respondent authorities, that notices had been served on

¶437

¶438

RRR, J W.P.No.37624 of 2017 & batch

¶439

the petitioners prior to passing of orders of resumption, nor the contention that the orders were also served on the petitioners.

¶440

Apart from this, the ground on which the resumption is said to have been done is the non-cultivation of the lands within the first three years of assignment. In a similar situation, a learned Single Judge of this Court in the case of Y.C. Venkata Subbamma vs. State of Andhra Pradesh (neutral citation 2021:APHC:16895) had held, following the earlier Judgment of the erstwhile High Court of Andhra Pradesh in the case of B. Mani vs. Government of Andhra Pradesh, rep. by District Collector, Chittoor District and others¹ and G. Munilakshmamma vs. The District Collector, Chittoor District² , that such cancellation after the initial period of three years is over and after considerable period of time has elapsed cannot be done on the mere ground of non-cultivation of lands for the first three years after assignment of the lands. Following the same Judgments, this Court would also hold that the DKT pattas, granted to the petitioners, cannot be cancelled on this ground.

¶441

For all the aforesaid reasons, it must be held that the cancellation of pattas granted to the petitioners and the resumption of their lands is in violation of law and as such, the said orders are set aside.

¶442

The learned Assistant Government Pleader would submit that an extent of Ac.400.00 of land had been acquired and the said lands have been

¶443

1 2011 (1) ALT 334

¶444

2 1999 (1) ALT 617

¶445

¶446

RRR, J W.P.No.37624 of 2017 & batch

¶447

handed over to an Industrial unit. However, the said Industrial Unit is also facing difficulty on account of the Interlocutory Orders passed earlier by this Court and on the question of possession of the land. The learned Assistant Government Pleader would submit that the Authorities would take steps to resume the lands, in accordance with law. In view of the aforesaid submission, it would be open to the Government to resume the said lands. However, such resumption would also require the Government to pay compensation in accordance with the Judgment of the High Court of Andhra Pradesh in the case of LAO-cum-Revenue Divisional Officer v. Mekala Pandu and others³ .

¶448