Dismissed¶¶34

Guvvala Chinna Subbarao v. the State of Ap

Andhra Pradesh HC21 Jan 2026WP/34169/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

AP High Court writ petition dismissed as infructuous; challenge to Tahsildar Kothapatnam's patta cancellation (Rc.No.B/88/2024, 12.06.2024) already upheld by RDO appellate order 12.12.2025; statutory revision remedy before Joint Collector, Prakasam within 60 days under Section 4(1), A.P. Assigned Lands (Prohibition of Transfers) Act, 1977; complaints of absent grama sabha and tom tom; Articles 14, 21 and 300A invoked in the prayer; no representation for petitioner; no order as to costs; miscellaneous petitions closed.

What did the court decide?

None; writ petition dismissed as infructuous, interim order (if any) deemed vacated, and no order as to costs. ¶¶34

Guvvala Chinna Subbarao Vs the State of Ap — Writ and Judicial Review | Andhra Pradesh HC (2026)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

None; writ petition dismissed as infructuous, interim order (if any) deemed vacated, and no order as to costs.

¶¶34

Issue for consideration

Whether the cancellation of the petitioner's patta by the Tahsildar, declaring the land government land without conducting grama sabha or commencing tom tom, and relying on statements of villagers belonging to the 5th respondent's community while rejecting statements favouring the petitioner, is unlawful and violative of the petitioner's rights under Articles 14, 21 and 300A of the Constitution. +1 more

¶¶29

Ratio / Principle

The appellate authority (3rd respondent) had already delivered an order dated 12.12.2025 upholding the order of the Tahsildar, Kothapatnam passed in Rc.No.B/88/2024 dated 12.06.2024.

¶¶30

Key takeaways

The petitioner was informed that a revision petition lies within 60 days before the Joint Collector, Prakasam, if aggrieved by the order of the 3rd respondent, under sub-section (1) of Section 4 of the A.P. Assigned Lands (Prohibition of Transfers) Act, 1977.ratio¶¶30
As per the said written instructions of the 3rd respondent dated 18.12.2025, no cause survives in the writ petition.ratio¶¶31
The writ petition is dismissed as infructuous; interim order(s), if any, deemed vacated; no order as to costs.

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Writ Petition No. 34169/2025 (High Court of Andhra Pradesh at Amaravati; Justice B Krishna Mohan; 22.01.2026): Guvvala Chinna Subbarao challenged the Tahsildar, Kothapatnam's cancellation of his patta and its declaration as government land (Rc.No.B/88/2024 dated 12.06.2024), alleging that no grama sabha was conducted, tom tom was not commenced, and statements were taken only from villagers of the 5th respondent's community while pro-petitioner statements were rejected; he sought resumption, mutation and an order on RC No.850/2025. On the Assistant Government Pleader's submission of the 3rd respondent's written instructions dated 18.12.2025, the Court recorded that the appellate authority (3rd respondent) had already upheld the Tahsildar's order by its own order dated 12.12.2025 and that a revision petition lay within 60 days before the Joint Collector, Prakasam under Section 4(1) of the A.P. Assigned Lands (Prohibition of Transfers) Act, 1977. Finding no cause surviving, the Court dismissed the writ petition as infructuous, deemed interim orders vacated, ordered no costs, and closed pending miscellaneous petitions.

¶1

[3233]

¶2

APHC010600142025

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI

¶4

(Special Original Jurisdiction)

¶5

THURSDAY, THE TWENTY SECOND DAY OF JANUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX

¶6

PRESENT

¶7

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE B KRISHNA MOHAN

¶8

WRIT PETITION NO: 34169/2025

¶9

Between:

¶10

GUVVALA CHINNA SUBBARAO, S/O. VENKATA SUBBAIAH R/O. PADARTHI VILLAGE,KOTHAPATNAM MANDAL, PRAKASAM DISTRICT. A.P.STATE. ADHARNO. 5717 4565 2557

¶11

...PETITIONER

¶12

AND

¶13

THE STATE OF AP, REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, REVENUE DEPARTMENT, 4TH BLOCK, GROUND FLOOR, ROOM NO 135, A.P SECRETARIAT OFFICE, VELAGAPUDI, AMARAVATHI, GUNTUR DISTRICT, ANDHRA PRADESH.

¶14

THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, ONGOLE MANDAL. PRAKASAM DISTRICT A.P. STATE.

¶15

REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER, ONGOLE MANDAL. PRAKASAM DISTRICT A.P. STATE.

¶16

THETAHSILDARM R O, KOTHAPATNAM, KOTHAPATNAM MANDAL, PRAKASAM DISTRICT.

¶17

YALLAGALA HARI BABU, S/O. AUDEIAH,PADARTHI VILLAGE, KOTHAPATNAM MANDAL, PRAKASARM DISTRICT.A.P.

¶18

...RESPONDENT(S):

¶19

Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court

¶20

¶21

may be pleased topleased to issue writ or more particularly writ of mandamus to declare the act of Tahsildar cancellation of patta of the petitioner and declare it as the government land, without conducting grama sabha, without commencing tom tom in the village, for the sake of avoid villagers belong to all the communities and receiving the statements of few villagers who belong to the community of respondent5, and rejected the statements of villagers who come forward for giving statement in favour of the petitioner, which violates the right of the petitioner under article 14, article 21, and article 300A of constitution of India consequently direct the respondent-4 to resume the land to the petitioner and mutate the same in the name of the petitioner, to direct the Respondent to pronounce the order in accordance with law with regard to RC No.850/2025 with immediate effect, and also grant

¶22

Counsel for the Petitioner:

¶23

1.V ANJANEYA RAJU

¶24

Counsel for the Respondent(S):

¶25

1.GP FOR REVENUE

¶26

¶27

The Court made the following Order:

¶28

No representation for the petitioner. Heard the learned Assistant Government Pleader for the respondent Nos.1 to 4.

¶29

This writ petition was filed questioning the action of the Tahsildar cancelling the patta of the petitioner declaring it as the government land without conducting grama sabha and without commencing tom tom in the village, for the sake to avoid villagers belonging to all the communities and receiving the statements of few villagers who belong to the community of the 5^th respondent and rejected the statements of villagers who come forward for giving statements in favour of the petitioner.

¶30

On the other hand, the learned Assistant Government Pleader relying upon the written instructions of the 3^rd respondent dated 18.12.2025 submits that the appellate authority/ the 3^rd respondent delivered the order dated 12.12.2025 upholding the order of the Tahsildar, Kothapatnam passed in Rc.No.B/88/2024, dated 12.06.2024. The petitioner has been informed that the revision petition lies within 60 days before the Joint Collector, Prakasam, if aggrieved by the order of the 3^rd respondent under sub-section (1) of the Section 4 of the A.P. Assigned Lands (Prohibition of Transfers) Act, 1977.

¶31