IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH :: AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) MONDAY, THE TWENTY SEVENTH DAY OF JANUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SMT. JUSTICE KIRANMAYEE MANDAVA WRIT PETITION NO: 12759 OF 2020 Between: 1. B.Kesavachari, S/o. late B.Krishnamachari, Aged about 42 Molakalacheruvu Town and Mandal Chittoor District. M.Sivapradad Reddy, S/o M.Raja Reddy, Aged 52 Molakalacheruvu Town and Mandal Chittoor District. years 2. years ...PETITIONERS AND 1. The State of Andhra Pradesh, Reptd by the Principal Secretary Revenue Secretariat, A.P., Amaravathi. The District Collector, Chittoor. The Joint Collector, Chittoor. The Sub-Collector, Madanapalle Chittoor District. The Tahsildar, Molakalacheruvu Chittoor District. T.Venkatesu, S/o. Venkatappa, R/o. Old Molakalacheruvu, Chittoor District. Tudumu Sriramulu, S/o. Tudum Venkatappa, R/o. Old Molakalacheruv u Chittoor District. Tudum Chinna Kotappa, S/o. Tudum Venkatappa, R/o. Old Molakalacheruvu, Chittoor District. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. ...RESPONDENTS Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased to issue a writ or order or orders more fully one in the nature of a writ of mandamus declaring the orders passed by the respondent in proceedings No.D.Dis.(E4)/504/2017 dated 10-02-2020 wherein directed the 5^^ respondent to incorporate the names of the respondent No. 6 to 8 in ' confirming the orders of the 4‘^ respondent dated.26.12.2013 in D.Dis (B1)/ 4938/2008 and orders of the 5'^ respondent vide ROC.B/50/2008 dated.27.03.2008, in respect of an extent of Ac.2.71 cents in Sy.No.471/1 of Molakalacheruvu Village, Chittoor District is arbitrary, biased, unjustifiable and unconstitutional and without jurisdiction and consequently set aside the orders passed by the 3rd respondent in proceedings E4/504/2017, dated 10-02-2020 and orders of the 4'^ and 5'^^ respondents vide orders in D.Dis (B 1)74938/2008 dated.16.12.2013 and vide ROC.B/50/2008 dated. 27.03.2008. lA NO: 1 OF 2020 Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the writ petition, the High Court may be pleased to direct the respondents not to dispossess the petitioners from their possession and enjoyment of the property an extent of Ac.2.71 cents in Sy.No.471/1 of Molakalacheruvu Village, Chittoor District by suspending the orders passed by the 3 No.(E4)/504/2017, dated 10-02-2020 and orders of the 4*"^ and 5th respondents vide orders in D.Dis (B1)/4938/2008 dated. 16.12.2013 and vide ROC.B/50/2008 dated . 27.03.2008, pending disposal of the writ petition. respondent in proceedings D.Dis Counsel for the Petitioners : SRI SURESH KUMAR REDDY KALAVA Counsel for the Respondent Nos. 1 to 5 : GP FOR REVENUE Counsel for the Respondent Nos. 6 to 8 : NONE APPEARED The Court made the following: ORDER 1 APHC010197062020 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) IP [3458] MONDAY THE TWENTY SEVENTH DAY OF JANUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE KIRANMAYEE MANDAVA WRIT PETITION NO: 12759/2020 Between: ...PETITIONER(S) B.kesavachari and Others AND ...RESPONDENT(S) The State Of Andhra Pradesh and Others Counsel for the Petitloner(S): 1.SURESH KUMAR REDDY KALAVA Counsel for the Respondent{S): 1.GP FOR REVENUE The Court made the following: Heard Sri Suresh Kumar Reddy Kalava, learned counsel for the petitioners and learned Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue, appearing for the respondents. The writ petition is filed challenging the orders passed by the 3'^'^ respondent in proceedings No.D.Dis.(E4)/504/2017 dated 10.02.2020, directing the 5*^ respondent to incorporate the names of the respondent Nos.6 to 8, in respect of an extent of Ac.2.71 cents in Sy.No.471/1 of Molakalacheruvu Village, Chittoor District, by confirming the orders of the 2. 2 and orders of the dated 26.12.2013 in D.Dis (B1)/4938/2008 .B/50/2008 dated 27.03.2008. 4^^ respondent 5^^ respondent in ROC Sy.No.471/1 was assigned in Kotadu @ Pilla Kotadu. After his of one Sri .No.2237/1937, dated extent of land in Sri Madigapalle alienated the It is contended that an 1929 in favour of one his sons have Adinarayana Reddy vide 3. said property in favour lifetime, registered sale deed in Doc was not handed over to him. The Legal 16.09.1937, however, possession have transferred an extent of Ac.0.90 cents in favour of late Krishnamachari heirs of the assignee father of the 1"' petitioner Saheb vide registered one Sri Fakru Saheb. The the Sri Fakru sale deed dated of Adinarayanareddy from purchased 17 12.2007. The 2""* petitioner who is great grandson in 1937- Since the legal heirs of the land, the father Thus the legal heirs of the assignee insisting for re-registration purchased from of the original assignee were purchased an extent of Ac.0.90 cents land. of the 2"^^ petitioner contends that both the petitioners entitled for an extent of Ac.0.95 cents are respondent has cancelled land vide proceedings dated before the 4'^ cents of land respectively . However, the 5 Ac.0.90 the assignment made in respect of the subject the said order appeal was preferred 27.03.2008.Against The 4' dated 26.12.2013, respondent vide proceedings order of the 5'*^ respondent. respondent, confirmed the has filed writ petition in the 3^' action to incorporate Challenging the same, the 1 petitioner 2014, while the said respondent to take necessary 4. writ petition was pending V\/.P.No.2725 of respondent directed the 5' 3 the names of the legal heirs of the assignees, while passing the impugned order on the revision petition filed by the 1®' petitioner and his mother. The 3 rd respondent observed that the petitioners have failed adduce any evidence that the subject land is patta land. He further observed that 1®' petitioner’s father did not purchase from the original assignee. The learned counsel for the petitioner contends that the 5**^ respondent 5. has fraudulently in collusion with the un-official respondents has created forged documents in favour one Sri T.Venaktappa. The learned counsel in support of his contention relies on the proceedings issued on his application under RTI Act, to contend that there was no assignment in 1956. He argues that the respondent authorities have simply cancelled the assignment without verification of records, as to whether such a condition of non-alienation was the one of the conditions assignment at the relevant point of time 1926 and without examining as to wither the provisions of the Act would apply to the case. Thus prays the Court for set aside of the impugned order(s). The learned Government Pleader appearing for the respondents 6. supporting the orders of the authorities argues that one Sri Thudum Venkatappa was granted assignment in 1956 and after his demise the respondent Nos.6 to 8 have succeeded to the property. The authorities have rightly passed the impugned order. The unofficial respondents have refused to receive the notice issued in 7. the case. 8. Considered the rival submissions. The respondent authorities justifying their order have stated specific facts not mentioned in the impugned order. The petitioners also rely on certain documents that appear to have not been placed before the appellate and revision authorities. Having regard to the same, this Court, without going into the merits of the case, deems it appropriate to remand the matter to the 3"'^ respondent. 9. Accordingly, the Order dated 10.02.2020 is set-aside and the matter is remitted to the Revision authority, the 3'^'^ respondent to pass appropriate orders afresh after hearing both sides. The petitioners are at liberty to file necessary documents in support of their contentions. The petitioners shall place all the documents before the 3^^^ respondent within a period of two (02) weeks from the date of receipt of the orders of this Court. The 3'"^ respondent shall pass appropriate orders within three (03) months thereafter. 10. Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of. No costs. As a sequel, interlocutory applications, pending if any, shall stand closed. SDI- H.NAGAiV!r\/lA assistant^registrar OFFICER //TRUE COPY// SECT To 1. The Principal Secretary Revenue, State of Andhra A.P., Amaravathi. 2. The District Coiiector, Chittoor. 3. The Joint Collector, Chittoor. 4. The Sub-Collector, Madanapalle Chittoor District, ft n ® ^^hsi/dar, Molakalacheruvu Chittoor District 7. ?wo CCS ot [OPUC] 8. Three C.D. Copied Andhra Pradesh. [OUT] Pradesh, Secretariat Cnr HIGH COURT DATED:27/01/2025 JP = 2 6 MAR 2025 ° P9 Current Section ORDER WP.No.12759 of 2020 DISPOSING OF THE W.P. WITHOUT COSTS