APHC010152442025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3329] TUESDAY ,THE TWENTY FIFTH DAY OF MARCH TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE VENKATESWARLU NIMMAGADDA WRIT PETITION NO: 7762/2025 Between: Setti Latchapatrudu and Others ...PETITIONER(S) AND The State Of Andhra Pradesh and Others ...RESPONDENT(S) Counsel for the Petitioner(S): 1. T V SRI DEVI Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. GP FOR REVENUE The Court made the following ORDER: 1. This Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking the following relief: “to issue a writ order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Mandamus declaring the action of the 4th respondent in contemplating to mutate the names of 8th and 9th respondents in revenue records without issuing notice to petitioners and without considering petitioners objections dated 19.02.2025 not to grant pattadar pass book, title deeds in respect of lands to an extent of Ac.5.25 cents in Sy.No.883 Ac.2.40 cts in Sy.No.90,Ac.4.04 cts in Sy No.1963 in total Ac.11.69 cents situated in Amalapuram Village, Narsipatnam Mandal, Anakapalli District, pending the Civil suit in O.S.No.116 of 2022 old number O.S.No.7 of 2016 on the file of VII Additional District and Sessions Judge Visakhapatnam as illegal arbitrary and violative of Article 14 and 21 of Constitution of India and consequently direct the respondent Nos.2 to 4 not to mutate as the revenue entries in respect of lands in Sy.88-3, 90 and 196-3 of Amalapuram Village, Narsipatnam Mandal, Anakapalli District in favour of respondent Nos.7 to 9 or any other person pending the Civil suit in O.S.No.116 of 2022 old Number O.S.No.7 of 2016 on the file of VII Additional District and Sessions Judge Visakhapatnam and to pass such other order or orders...” 1. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Government Pleader appearing for the respondents. 2. The case of the petitioner is that the 4th respondent has contemplated issuing revenue records in favor of respondent Nos. 8 and 9 ignoring the claim of the petitioners, who are the legal heirs and rightful owners of the subject property. 3. The learned counsel for the petitioners submits that, in view of the order of this Court dated 19.02.2025 in W.P. No. 3701 of 2025, the 4th respondent is contemplating to amend the revenue records in favor of respondent Nos. 8 and 9, replacing respondent No. 6, who is the original pattadar. Respondent No. 6 is the father of the petitioners, and the petitioners are joint right holders along with him. However, without considering the claims or objections of the petitioners, the 4th respondent issued proceedings pursuant to the Court's order dated 19.02.2025 in W.P. No. 3701 of 2025. If such proceedings are carried out without due consideration, the rights of the petitioners will be defeated. Hence, the present writ petition. 4. On the other hand, the learned Assistant Government Pleader submits that the order passed by this Court on 19.02.2025 in W.P. No. 3701 of 2025 clearly and categorically states that the 4th respondent shall adhere to the principles of natural justice and issue notice to all the interested parties concerned to the subject property. Therefore, the petitioners' apprehension is unfounded, as the 4th respondent will follow the procedure as contemplated by this Court in its order dated 19.02.2025 in W.P. No. 3701 of 2025. 5. Having considered the submissions of the learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned counsel for the respondents, the order passed by this court dated 19.02.2025 in W.P. No. 3701 of 2025, as under:- (4) “Needless to state that the respondent No.4 is statutory obliged to adhere to the principles of natural justice by issuing advance notice to all the interested parties including the writ petitioners herein, consider their submissions/objections and documents, if any, before passing the final order. (5) Writ petitioners are directed to submit a copy of this order along with the photocopy of the application for mutation dated 05.12.2024 (Ex.P1) to respondent No.4 within one week from today, for effective compliance”. 6. On perusal of the order of this Court, it is evident that the Court specifically directed the 4th respondent to follow the principles of natural justice and consider the claim of all interested parties before making any amendments in respect of the subject property. Therefore, the 4th respondent cannot deviate from the procedure prescribed by this Court. It is a settled principle of law that once a Constitutional Court directs an authority to follow a specific procedure, the authority is bound to comply the same and cannot deviate from such procedure. 7. As contended by the learned counsel for the petitioners, the petitioners have already raised objections before the 4th respondent regarding their rights over the subject property. However, they are contending that, without considering their objections, the 4th respondent is proceeding to amend the Record of Rights (ROR) in favor of respondent Nos. 8 and 9. This concern appears to be merely apprehensive, as the 4th respondent has been specifically directed by this Court, in its order dated 19.02.2025 in W.P. No. 3701 of 2025, to consider all objections from all the interested parties. 8. In view of the reasons stated above, the 4th respondent is once again directed to consider the objections of the petitioners and pass appropriate order under Section 5 of the A.P. Land Encroachment and Pattadar Passbook Act, 1971, in compliance with this Court’s order. Meanwhile, all parties concerned shall maintain the status quo obtaining as on today in respect of the subject property. 9. With the above direction, the writ petition is disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs. Consequently, Miscellaneous Petitions, if any, pending in the writ petition shall stand closed. ______________________________________ VENKATESWARLU NIMMAGADDA, J 25.03.2025 klk 115 HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE VENKATESWARLU NIMMAGADDA WRIT PETITION No.7762 of 2025 25.03.2025 kkllkk