APHC010149962025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3329] FRIDAY ,THE TWENTY EIGHTH DAY OF MARCH TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE VENKATESWARLU NIMMAGADDA WRIT PETITION NO: 8134/2025 Between: Sampengala Veeraiah, ...PETITIONER AND The State Of Andhra Pradesh and Others ...RESPONDENT(S) Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. HANUMANTHA RAO BACHINA Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. GP FOR REVENUE The Court made the following: THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE VENKATESWARLU NIMMAGADDA WRIT PETITION NO:8134/2025 ORDER: The present writ petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking following relief: “to issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ or order or direction declaring the action of the 4th respondent in entertaining the mutation application of the unofficial respondents in respect of the land in Survey No.108/5 for an extent of Ac.1.09 cents of land in Kondumuru Village, J.Pangaluru Mandal, Bapatla District formerly Prakasam District in respect of the pendency of the suit proceedings in final decree petition 440/2023 and I.A.No.729/2024 in O.S.No 49 of 2021 on the file of Principal Civil Judge Court (Junior Division, Addanki of Prakasam District) are pending and without following any procedure contemplated under the A.P. Rights in Land and Pattadar Passbooks Act, 1971 and rules made there under as illegal, arbitrary, without power authority and contrary to the provisions of A.P. Rights in land and pattadar passbooks act, 1971 and violation of Article 300-A of the Constitution of India and consequently direct the 4th respondent not to entertain any mutation application of the unofficial respondents in respect of land in Survey No.108/5 for an extent of Ac.1.09 cents of land in Kondumuru Village, J.Pangaluru Mandal, Bapatla District formerly Prakasam District in the interest of the justice and pass such other order or orders….” 2. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Government Pleader for Revenue for the respondents. 3. The claim of the petitioner herein is that the petitioner is a coparcener and joint family property holder in respect of the land admeasuring to an extent of Ac.1.09 cents in Sy.No.108/5 situated at Kondumuru Village, J.Pangaluru Mandal, Bapatla District formerly Prakasam District along with the other lands. The petitioner herein instituted a suit for partition by way of O.S.No 49 of 2021 on the file of Principal Civil Judge Court (Junior Division, Addanki of Prakasam District), wherein the Court below was pleased to pass a preliminary decree dated 01.02.2023. After the preliminary decree was passed, the petitioner herein filed an I.A.No.729/2024 in O.S.No.49 of 2021 seeking for an amendment of plaint to include the another schedule property as one of the suit schedule properties. The further claim of the petitioner herein is that contrary to the preliminary decree, respondent No.6 herein submitted an application seeking mutation of her name against the entire land and the respondents are taking steps for mutation in favour of the unofficial respondents contrary to the preliminary decree pending for final decree. He further asserts that, once suit for partition is pending, altering the revenue record is contrary to law and nothing but interfering with judicial process. Hence, the writ petition. 4. On the other hand, learned Government Pleader for the respondents submitted written instructions dated 28.03.2025, wherein, the operative portion of the said order is extracted hereunder: “The unofficial respondents have not filed any application for mutation of the name of the 6th respondent i.e., Sampengala Ruthamma W/o Salmoman for an extent of Ac.1.09 cents in Sy.No 108/5 of Kondamur village in the revenue records, webland and to issue e-pattadar passbook cum title deed in her favour. If any such application is received, action will be taken to enquire in to the matter under the provisions of the A.P.Rights in land and pattadar passbook Act, 1971 and rules framed thereon. Notices will be issued in accordance with the rules, opportunity of personal hearing will be provided to all the interested parties and then appropriate orders will be passed in the accordance with the law.” 5. In view of the clear and categorical statement made in the written instructions, the authorities shall adhere to follow due procedure as contemplated under the A.P. Rights in land and pattadar passbook Act, 1971. 6. Having regard to the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Government Pleader for the respondents, on perusal of the material placed on record, this Court is of the considered view that the present writ petition can be disposed of, directing the petitioner to submit objections, if any, in respect of the mutation application submitted by respondent No.6 herein, within a period of two (02) weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. On receipt of such objections, respondent No.4 herein is directed to consider the same, after providing opportunity of hearing to all the parties concerned and pass appropriate orders, in accordance with law, within a period of two (02) months, thereafter. 7. With the above direction, the writ petition is disposed of. No costs. Consequently, Miscellaneous Petitions, if any, pending in the writ petition shall stand closed. _______________________________ VENKATESWARLU NIMMAGADDA, J 28.03.2025 BSP 348 THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE VENKATESWARLU NIMMAGADDA WRIT PETITION No.8134 of 2025 28.03.2025 BSP