APHC010173862025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3329] FRIDAY ,THE FOURTH DAY OF APRIL TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE VENKATESWARLU NIMMAGADDA WRIT PETITION NO: 8919/2025 Between: Smt.gali Vasumathi, ...PETITIONER AND The State Of Andhra Pradesh and Others ...RESPONDENT(S) Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. A P REDDY Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. GP FOR REVENUE The Court made the following: THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE VENKATESWARLU NIMMAGADDA WRIT PETITION NO:8919/2025 ORDER: The present writ petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking following relief: “to issue a Writ, Order or Direction more particularly in the nature of a WRIT OF MANDAMUS declaring the Order No.D.Dis.334/2024/A dated 24.03.2025 passed by Respondent No.4 as arbitrary, illegal and colourable exercise and misuse of powers contemplated under law and also violation of Article 300-A of the Constitution of India apart from violation of Principles of Natural Justice and to set aside the said Order and consequently stay of all further proceedings in pursuance of the Order No D.Dis.334/2024/A dated 24.03.2025 passed by Respondent No.4 and pass such other order or orders….” 2. Heard learned senior counsel for the petitioner and learned Government Pleader for Revenue for the respondents. 3. Learned senior counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the petitioner herein is the absolute owner and possessor of the land admeasuring to an extent of Ac.2.42 cents in Sy.No.905/2 situated at Dharmavaram Village and Mandal, Satya Sai District having acquired the same through a registered sale deed. Learned senior counsel for the petitioner further submits that the respondents confirmed the subject land as private patta land by way of counter affidavit filed in O.A.No.41/2023 before the National Green Tribunal Southern Zone, Chennai. But, Contrary to the facts, the respondents issued notices in Form-I and Form-II classifying the subject land is a assigned land and passed the impugned order. Hence, the writ petition. 4. On the other hand, learned Government Pleader for the respondents submits that even though the petitioner was served notice in Form-I and Form-II as per the provisions of the Andhra Pradesh Assigned Lands (Prohibition of Transfers) Act, 1977 (in short ‘Act 9 of 1977’), the petitioner herein neither submitted any explanation nor participated in the enquiry as required. She further submits that the present impugned proceedings dated 24.03.2025 issued by respondent No.4 are appealable under Section 4A of the Act 9 of 1977. She further submits that once the petitioner is available with an effective alternative remedy by way of filing an appeal, invoking extraordinary jurisdiction of this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India cannot be amenable for adjudication by this Court. She further submits that since it requires much enquiry and evidence for determination whether the land is assigned land or not. The statutory appellate authority i.e., competent authority shall go into the matter after conducting detailed enquiry and after inviting so much evidence either oral or material evidence on record to determine the nature of the land. 5. 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, it is observed that the core issue to be decided in the present writ petition is determination of nature of land, whether the land claiming by the petitioner situated in Sy.No.905/2 is assigned land or private patta land. The said determination of nature of land is always at the domain of the statutory authorities and that too to be determined after having so much of evidence and enquiry and after perusing the record. Certainly, this Court without any evidence, cannot determine the nature of land. Moreover the alleged admission by the respondents before National Green Tribunal cannot be much relied as an admission, since the issue and claim is different and not for determination of title. 6. Hence, this Court is inclined to dispose of the writ petition, directing the petitioner to avail statutory alternative remedy by way of filing an appeal before the appellate authority i.e,. respondent No.3 herein within a period of three (03) weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. On receipt of such Appeal, respondent No.3 is under statutory obligation to consider the same, taking into consideration all the aspects and after conducting a detailed enquiry and after providing opportunity of hearing to the petitioner as well as other stake holders if any and after perusing the material placed on record in respect of determination of nature of land and pass appropriate orders, in accordance with law, as early as possible. Till disposal of the appeal, status quo obtaining as on today shall be maintained by all the parties concerned in respect of the subject property. 7. With the above directions, 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 04.04.2025 BSP 77 THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE VENKATESWARLU NIMMAGADDA WRIT PETITION No.8919 of 2025 04.04.2025 BSP