APHC010124222025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3329] WEDNESDAY ,THE NINETEENTH DAY OF MARCH TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE VENKATESWARLU NIMMAGADDA WRIT PETITION NO: 6699/2025 Between: Smt. Jaliparthi Samrajyam ...PETITIONER AND The State Of Andhra Pradesh and Others ...RESPONDENT(S) Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. VALLURU CHETAN SUSHEEL Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. GP FOR REVENUE The Court made the following: 2 THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE VENKATESWARLU NIMMAGADDA WRIT PETITION NO: 6699/2025 ORDER: This writ petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of the India seeking the following reliefs:- “to issue a writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the endorsement No.L.D.C./MUT250118039791/2025, dated 03.02.2025 issued by the Respondent No.4 for the land in Sy.No.7/1E, to an extent of Ac.2.00 cents situated in Chillaboinapalli Village, Musunuru Mandal, Eluru District as Illegal, Arbitrary, Contrary to Circular and Violative of Principles of Natural Justice and consequently set aside the said endorsement and further direct the Respondent Nos.2 to 4 to mutate the name of the petitioner in the revenue records for the said land and pass such other order.” 2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Government Pleader for the respondents. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner herein submitted a representation seeking mutation of her name in the revenue records as per her entitlement. But without proper appreciation and consideration by the 4th respondent, the 4th respondent issued endorsement dated 03.02.2025, contrary to the entitlement of the petitioner as well as facts stated in the application of the petitioner dated 18.01.2025. Therefore, the said endorsement of the 4th respondent dated 03.02.2025 is liable to be set aside. 4. On the other hand, learned Government Pleader for the respondents submits that as per Section 5(2) of the Andhra Pradesh 3 Rights in Land and Pattadar Pass Books Act, 1971, the 4th respondent is not entitled to make any finding on his own basing on the representation of the petitioner and he has to forward the same to higher authority i.e., 3rd respondent herein to make a finding or to determined the entitlement of the petitioner. 5. Having regard to the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Government Pleader for the respondents and on perusal of the endorsement issued by the 4th respondent, it is observed that as per Section 5(2) of the Andhra Pradesh Rights in Land and Pattadar Pass Books Act, 1971, the 3rd respondent is the competent authority to consider the claim of the petitioner for mutation/granting rights in favour of the petitioner. It appears that thse impugned endorsement dated 03.02.2025 is contrary to Section 5(2) of the Act. The 4th respondent has to forward the same to the 3rd respondent to determine the rights of the petitioner. 6. In view of the reasons stated above, the endorsement dated 03.02.2025 is hereby set aside. However, the respondents are at liberty to proceed further pursuant to the representation submitted by the petitioner for granting mutation in accordance with law. 7. With the above direction, the Writ Petition is disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs. 4 As a sequel miscellaneous application, pending, if any, shall also stand closed. ________________________________ VENKATESWARLU NIMMAGADDA, J 19.03.2025 TTPPSS 5 174 HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE VENKATESWARLU NIMMAGADDA WRIT PETITION NO: 6699 of 2025 19.03.2025 TTPPSS