Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Andhra Pradesh · body

2025 DAILYLAW 11584 (AP)

R. SUBRAMANYAM REDDY v. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH

WP/7238/2025 · 2025-03-21

Venkateswarlu Nimmagadda

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

APHC010134712025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3329] FRIDAY ,THE TWENTY FIRST DAY OF MARCH TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE VENKATESWARLU NIMMAGADDA WRIT PETITION NO: 7238/2025 Between: R. Subramanyam Reddy and Others ...PETITIONER(S) AND The State Of Andhra Pradesh and Others ...RESPONDENT(S) Counsel for the Petitioner(S): 1. SURESH KUMAR REDDY KALAVA Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. GP FOR REVENUE The Court made the following ORDER: This writ petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of the India seeking the following reliefs:- “to issue a WRIT OF MANDAMUS declaring the action of the Respondent No 3 in not considering the Appeal filed on 24 08 2024 for cancellation of Pattadar Passbooks granted in favour of the Respondent Nos.7 to 21 in respect of an extent of 7.43 acres in S.No.411 /1; 5.83 acres in S.No.409/2 and 17.00 acres in S.No.349/1 of Mogilepalli village, Gangavaram Mandal, Chittoor District as nothing but illegal, arbitrary and violative of guidelines issued in Chinnam Pandurangams case reported in 2007 (6) ALD 348 FB apart from being violative of fundamental and constitutional rights guaranteed under Articles 14 21 and 300 A of The Constitution of India and consequently direct 2 the Respondent No.6 not to entertain further transactions over the subject extents i.e., an extent of 7.43 acres in S.No.411/1, 5.83 acres in S.No.409/2 and 17.00 acres in S.No.349/1 of Mogilepalli village Gangavaram Mandal Chittoor Districtand pass such other order.” 2. The learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the land admeasuring to an extent of Ac. 7.43 cents in Sy. No. 411/1, Ac.5.83 in Sy. No. 409/2, and Ac. 17.00 cents in Sy. No. 349/1 of Mogilipalli Village belongs to the petitioners, who have succeeded to the subject property by virtue of succession and heredity as legal heirs of the deceased. The property was acquired from their ancestors and was bequeathed to them by their paternal grandfather through a registered Will dated 01.10.1971, transferring ownership in favor of his grandsons. Since then, the petitioners have been in continuous possession and enjoyment of the subject property. He further submits that the petitioners' ancestors never alienated the subject property to anyone. However, the 5th respondent, i.e., the Tahsildar, in collusion with respondents Nos. 7 to 21, has wrongfully granted pattadar passbooks in their favor concerning the subject property. It is also submitted that the 5th respondent did not conduct a proper enquiry before granting the pattadar passbooks to respondents Nos.7 to 21. Aggrieved by this, the petitioners preferred an appeal before the 3rd respondent on 24.08.2024, seeking cancellation of the pattadar passbooks issued in favor of respondents Nos. 7 to 21 with respect to the subject property. However, despite receiving the appeal, the respondent authorities not consider the appeal preferred by the petitioners so far. Hence, the present writ petition. 3 3. Learned Government Pleader for the respondents submits that the respondents will consider the appeal preferred by the petitioners dated 24.08.2024 and pass appropriate orders in accordance with law, within a reasonable time. 4. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Government Pleader for Revenue appearing for the respondents. 5. Having regard to the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Government Pleader for Revenue appearing for the respondents and on perusal of the material placed on record, this Court is of the considered opinion the present Writ Petition can be disposed of directing the 3rd respondent to consider the appeal dated 24.08.2024 preferred by the petitioner by providing an opportunity of hearing to all the parties concerned and pass appropriate orders in accordance with law within in period of three (03) months from the date of receipt of copy of this order. 6. With the above directions, the Writ Petition is disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs. As a sequel miscellaneous application, pending, if any, shall also stand closed. ________________________________ VENKATESWARLU NIMMAGADDA, J 21.03.2025 kkllkk 4 154 HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE VENKATESWARLU NIMMAGADDA WRIT PETITION NO: 7238 of 2025 21.03.2025 kkllkk