Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Andhra Pradesh · body

2025 DAILYLAW 14455 (AP)

K. Jayaramireddy v. The State of Andhra Pradesh,

WP/9356/2025 · 2025-04-10

Venkateswarlu Nimmagadda

Original Suitbody2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

APHC010178772025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3329] THURSDAY ,THE TENTH DAY OF APRIL TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE VENKATESWARLU NIMMAGADDA WRIT PETITION NO: 9356/2025 Between: K. Jayaramireddy ...PETITIONER AND The State Of Andhra Pradesh and Others ...RESPONDENT(S) Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. N ASWARTHA NARAYANA Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. GP FOR REVENUE 2. GP FOR REGISTRATION AND STAMPS The Court made the following: 2 THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE VENKATESWARLU NIMMAGADDA WRIT PETITION NO: 9356/2025 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 action of the respondent No.4 in entertaining and processing the enquiry for alteration entries in respect of land in Sy.No.283 to an extent of Ac.No.6.49 cents situated at Kodiginahalli Village, Parigi Mandal, Sri Sathya Sai District in spite of pendency of title dispute vide in O.S.No3 of 2025 on the file of the Additional District Judge, Hindupur contrary to the Section 8(2) of the A.P. Rights and Pattadaar Passbooks Act, 1971 and also the action of the 5th respondent entertaining and processing the registration in respect of schedule properties in O.S.No.3 of 2025 on the file of the Additional District Judge, Hindupur is illegal, arbitrary and consequently to direct the respondent Nos.4 and 5 not to undertake any exercise in respect of schedule properties in O.S.No.3 of 2025 on the file of the Additional District Judge, Hindupur either alteration or registration 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 suit schedule properties are the joint family properties. The petitioner instituted O.S.No.3 of 2025 on the file of the Additional District Judge, Hinduur against the unofficial respondents/other joint family members seeking for partition and separate possession of his share out of the 3 suit schedule properties and the same is pending for adjudication. Pending the civil suit, at the instance of the unofficial respondents, the 4th respondent is trying to decide the shares among the family members and trying to mutate their names in revenue records. Hence, the petitioner submitted a representation dated 01.05.2025 requesting the 4th respondent not to entertain any sort of application for alteration of entries in revenue records in respect of the land admeasuring to an extent of Ac.6.49 cents in Sy.No.283 of Kodiginahalli Village, Parigi Mandal, Sri Sathya Sai District. But the 4th respondent did not consider the same. Hence, the present Writ Petition. 4. On the other hand, learned Government Pleader for the respondents furnished written instructions, wherein it is stated that the Tahsildar, Parigi or Revenue Divisional Officer, Penukonda are not at all competent to interfere with the subject private patta land, until the finalization of the civil suit. The 4th respondent did not intend to entertain any sort of alteration of entries in respect of the subject land in Sy.No.283 and it is only a mere apprehension 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 material placed on record, this Court deems it appropriate to dispose of the Writ Petition directing 4 the respondents, if the respondents intend to make any alternation/change of entries, they shall issue a prior notice to the petitioner and follow due process of law. 6. With the above direction, 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 10.04.2025 TTPPSS 5 241 HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE VENKATESWARLU NIMMAGADDA WRIT PETITION NO:9356 of 2025 10.04.2025 TTPPSS