N APHC010296472025 f IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) S5S B TUESDAY, THE TWENTY FOURTH DAY OF JUNE TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE VENKATESWARLU NIMMAGADDA WRIT PETITION NO: 15068 OF 2025 Between: B. T. Srinivasulu, S/o. B. Bandaiah, Aged about 48 years, R/o. D. No. 5/73, B. C. Colony, Palthur Village, Vidapanakal Mandal Anantapur District. ...Petitioner AND 1. The State of Andhra Pradesh, Rep. by its Principal Secretary, Revenue Department, Secretariat Buildings, Velagapudi, Amaravati Guntur District. 2. The District Collector, Anantapur, Anantapur District. 3. The District Revenue Officer, Anantapur, Anantapur District. 4. The Revenue Divisional Officer, Anantapur Division, Anantapur District. 5. The Tahsildar, Vidapanakal Mandal, Anantapur District. 6. Sri M. V. Krishna Prasad, S/o. V. Srinivasa Rao, Aged about 56 years, R/o. 10/18, Bommanahal Road, Ballery District, Karnataka State. ...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, Order, or Direction, more particularly in the nature of a Writ of Mandamus by declaring the action of the respondents specifically, the 4‘^ respondent in issuing notice vide Rc. No. A/1631/2024 dated 09.05.2025, as illegal, arbitrary, and violative of the fundamental rights guaranteed under Articles 14, 19, and 300-A of the Constitution of India, and more contrary to the express provisions of the Andhra Pradesh Rights in Land and Pattadar Pass Books Act, 1971. Consequently, set aside same. lA NO: 1 OF 2025 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 stay all further proceedings in the notice issued by the 4 respondent vide Rc. No. A/1631/2024 dated: 09.05.2025. th Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI K. SRINIVAS Counsel for the Respondent Nos.1 to 5 : GP FOR REVENUE Counsel for the Respondent No.6 : NONE APPEARED The Court made the following order: APHC010296472025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) 050 [3329] TUESDAY ,THE TWENTY FOURTH DAY OF JUNE TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE VENKATESWARLU NIMMAGADDA WRIT PETITION NO: 15068/2025 Between; B T Srinivasulu ...PETITIONER AND The State Of Ap and Others ...RESPONDENT{S) Counsel for the Petitioner; 1.KSRINIVAS Counsel for the Respondent(S); 1.GP FOR REVENUE The Court made the following 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 in the nature of a Writ of Mandamus by declaring the action of the respondents more specifically, the 4th respondent in issuing notice vide Rc. No. A/1631/2024 dated 09.05.2025, as illegal, arbitrary, and violative of the fundamental rights guaranteed under Articles 14, 19, and 300-A of the Constitution of India, and contrary to the express provisions of the Andhra 2 Pradesh Rights in Land and Pattadar Pass Books Act, 1971. Consequently, set aside same, and, pass and the learned learned counsel for the petitioners Government Pleader for Revenue appearing for the respondents^ Heard the 2. Assistant submits that the petitioner is of the subject land admeasuring to an 3. The learned counsel for the petitioner the absolute owner and possessor extent of Ac.11.20 cents in Sy.No.553 Vidapanakal Mandal, Ananthapuram registered gift deed executed by the petitioner s situated at Palthur Village, having acquired it ’s father dated District and through a and has been in possession also issued a Since then, the petitioner 24.01.2013. enjoyment of the subject property. The petitioner was in his favor, and his name was mutated pattadar passbook and title deeds in . records. While so, challenging the mutation proceedings in favor of the petitioner in respect of No.6 herein preferrd an in Land and Pattadar Pass the appellate in the revenue carried out by the revenue authorities in the subject property, the unofficial respondent section 5 (5) of the A.P. Rights in appeal under Books Act, 1971 before the 4’ In the said appeal, the 6'" of the revenue entries but pattadar passbooks and title respondent herein, who is re spondent not only prayed for the authority. also sought for cancellation of the favor of the alteration deeds already issued in petitioner. similar circumstance, this Hon’ble He further submits that, in a W.P.No.2769 of 2021 concerning 4. ino the same property, held that Court, in the RDO i.e., the 4‘^ respondent herein is not the appellate authority and he cannot entertain any appeal. 5. On the other hand, the learned Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue, appearing for the respondents, submits that at the time of the order of this Court in W.P.No.2769 of 2021 dated 22.08.2024, by virtue of the amended Section 5(2) of the A.P. Rights in Land and Pattadar Passbooks Act, 1971, the District Revenue Officer was designated as the appellate authority. Therefore, this Hon’ble Court rightly held that the RDO, i.e., the 4’'' respondent herein is not the competent authority to entertain any appeal and that any appeal entertained by the 4th respondent was without jurisdiction. 6. He further submits that, in the meantime. Section 5(2)(A) was again amended by way of Section 5(2) of the Andhra Pradesh Rights Land and Pattadar Passbooks Act, 1971, and the 4'*' respondent herein designated as the appellate authority for any appeal filed under Section 5(2)(A) of the Act. Therefore, the issuance of the impugned notice by the 4“" respondent dated 09.05.2025 is in compliance of the section 5 (2) of the act 1971 and cannot be canvassed as without jurisdiction. The notice issued by the 4th respondent is only deals with the entries in the revenue records and not with the cancellation of the pattadar passbooks and title deeds, as alleged by the petitioner. in IS 4 Having regard to the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue appearing for the respondents, and on perusal of the material available on record, it appears that the impugned notice dated 09.05.2025 was issued by the 4th respondent, who is the appellate authority as per the amended Act 8 of 2025. 7. As contended by the learned counsel for the petitioner, the 4th respondent has no jurisdiction to entertain any appeal for cancellation of Pattadar passbooks and title deeds, as prayed for by the 6th respondent. The contention that the 4th respondent lacks jurisdiction to entertain any appeal for cancellation of Pattadar passbooks and title deeds issued in favour of the petitioner is supported by settled law laid 8. down by this Court as well as by the Hon’ble Apex Court. However, in the present case, the impugned notice was not issued for the purpose of cancelling the Pattadar passbooks and title deeds, as contended by the petitioner. The issue to be decided by the 4th respondent pertains only to the revenue entries and mutation proceedings in favour of the petitioner. Therefore, the 4**^ respondent, being the appellate authority, is competent to adjudicate on the revenue entries and mutation proceedings in view of the appeal preferred by the 9. 6th respondent. 5 On perusal of the grounds of appeal, it is seen that the 6th respondent/appellant sought both the change of revenue entries and cancellation of Pattadar passbooks and title deeds issued in favour of the petitioner. However, the 4th respondent, in his capacity as the appellate authority, has consciously confined the scope of the appeal only to the revenue entries and mutation proceedings between the petitioner and the 6th respondent, which falls within his jurisdiction under Section 5 of the A.P. Act. 10. 11. Accordingly, the petitioner is directed to participate in the appeal proceedings by submitting his defence and required documents if any available to him, within the time specified by the 4th respondent. After considering the claims of both the petitioner and the 6th respondent, the 4th respondent shall pass appropriate orders in accordance with law with reference to the impugned notice dated 09.05.2025. 12. With the above observations, 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. Sd/- K. TATA RAO DEPUTY REGISTRAR //TRUE COPY// jr ^ SECTION OFFICER To, 1. The Principal Secretary, Revenue Department Pradesh, Secretariat Buildings, Velagapudi, Amaravati Guntur District. 2. The District Collector, Anantapur, Anantapur District. State of Andhra % 3. The District Revenue Officer, Anantapur, Anantapur District. 4. The Revenue Divisional Officer, Anantapur Division, Anantapur District. 5. The Tahsildar, Vidapanakal Mandal, Anantapur District. One CC to Sri K. Srinivas, Advocate [OPUC] Two CCs to GP for Revenue, High Court of Andhra Pradesh [OUT] 9. Two CD Copies Cnr HIGH COURT DATED:24/06/2025 ORDER WP NO. 15068 OF 2025 I n Jlit m m ^ . Current yeciion O DISPOSING OF THE W.P. WITHOUT COSTS