Sri KakaniRathnam @ Venkata Rathnam, Vs State of Andhra Pradesh

SRI KAKANIRATHNAM @ VENKATA RATHNAM,, S/O. LATE OBAIAH, AGED ABOUT 70 YEARS, NATIVE OF ANNAVARAM VILLAGE, JALADANKI MANDAL, SPSR NELLORE DISTRICT., R/O. 364, 2ND A MAIN, 7TH B CROSS, MUTHYALA NAGAR, BANGALORE- 560054. KARNATAKA STATE.

¶10

...PETITIONER

¶11

AND

¶12

STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP. BY ITS PRL. SECRETARY, REVENUE, A.P. SECRETARIAT, AMARAVATI, AT VELAGAPUDI, GUNTUR DISTRICT.

¶13

THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, SPSR NELLORE DISTRICT, NELLORE.

¶14

THETAHSILDHAR, JALADANKI, SPSR NELLORE DISTRICT.

¶15

THE SUB INSPECTOR, JALADANKI POLICE STATION, JALADANKI SPSR NELLORE DISTRICT.

¶16

ADAVIKOTTU MARIE, D/O. LATE OBAIAH, AGED ABOUT 47 YEARS, RJO. ANNAVARAM VILLAGE, JALADANKI MANDAL, SPSR NELLORE DISTRICT.

¶17

...RESPONDENT(S):

¶18

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 or order or direction more particularly one in the

¶19

2

¶20

nature of Writ Mandamus declaring the action of the 3rd respondent in not conducting enquiry for mutation of the name of the petitioner in the Revenue records and issue pass book and title deeds to the petitioner for an extent of Ac. 2-17 cents in Sy. No.s 429/1, 429 /2 situated at Annavaram Village, Jaladanki Mandal, SPSR Nellore District despite the application of the petitioner dt 14-09-2021 with a view to facilitate the 5th respondent to arrive at illegal settlement with the petitioner through the 4th respondent is illegal, arbitrary, high handed and in violation of Articles 14, 21 and 300-A of the Constitution of India, Principles of Natural Justice and provisions of Andhra Pradesh ( Rights in Land) and Pattadar Pass Books Act, 1971 and to consequently direct the 3rd respondent to mutate the name of the petitioner in the Revenue records and issue him Pass

¶21

IA NO: 1 OF 2022

¶22

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 3rd respondent to consider the application of the petitioner 14-092021 for Mutation of Revenue Records and issuance of Pass book and Title deed to the petitioner for an extent of Ac. 2-17 cents in Sy. Nos.429/1, 429 /2 situated at Annavaram Village, Jaladanki Mandal, SPSR Nellore District, pending disposal of the Writ petitionand pass

¶23

IA NO: 2 OF 2022

¶24

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 4th respondent not to summon the petitioner to the police station and interfere in the civil dispute between the petitioner and 5th respondent relating to an extent of Ac. 2-17 cents in Sy. Nos. 429/1, 429 /2 situated at Annavaram Village, Jaladanki Mandal, SPSR Nellore District, pending disposal of the writ petitionand pass

¶25

Counsel for the Petitioner:

¶26

1.PAVANI SIVA KUMAR

¶27

Counsel for the Respondent(S):

¶28

1.GP FOR HOME

¶29

2.GP FOR REVENUE

¶30

3.MANGENA SREE RAMA RAO

¶31

3

¶32

The Court made the following order:

¶33

Heard Sri Pavani Siva Kumar, learned counsel for the petitioner, Sri M.Chandra Sekhar, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue appearing for respondent Nos.1 to 3 and Sri Mangena Sree Rama Rao, learned counsel for respondent No.5.

¶34

The grievance of the petitioner in the instant writ petition is against the action of the 3^rd respondent in not conducting an enquiry for mutation of the petitioner’s name in the revenue records and for issuance of pattadar passbooks in respect of land in an extent of Ac.2.17 cents in Sy.Nos.429/1 and 429/2 situated at Annavaram Village, Jaladanki Mandal, SPSR Nellore District and consequently, seeks a direction to the 3^rd respondent to mutate his name.

¶35

The 3^rd respondent filed a counter affidavit stating that the petitioner is not in possession of the subject land. Therefore, pattadar passbooks cannot be issued. It is further stated that the settlement deed bearing Registration No.1925 of 2004 dated 26.08.2004, executed by Smt. Kakani Lakshmamma in favour of the 5^th respondent has not been cancelled. The petitioner said to have filed only the agreement of sale covering an extent of Ac.1.56 cents, and he did not produce any registered document for the balance extent of Ac.0.61 cents including the extent of Ac.1.56 cents. Thus, the pattadar passbook in favour of the petitioner by mutating his name was not issued.

¶36

4

¶37

Having regard to the contentions advanced, this Court is not inclined to

¶38

go into the merits of the respective claims of the petitioner and the unofficial respondents.

¶39

Having regard to the contentions advanced, this Court deems it appropriate to dispose of the writ petition with a direction to the 3^rd respondent to pass appropriate orders, in accordance with law, on the application filed by the petitioner dated 14.09.2021, within a period of two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order, after giving due opportunity of hearing to the petitioner and the unofficial respondents. It is needless to observe that the averments of the respective parties referred herein above are only for the purpose of adjudication of this case.

¶40