\ \ IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH :: AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) THURSDAY, THE NINTH DAY OF JANUARY / TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE GANNAMANENI RAMAKRISHNA PRAS WRIT PETITION NO: 479 OF 2025 I Between: Gangarapu Nagesh Babu, S/o Venkatappa, Aged about 52 years, R/o D.No.27-136/5, Police lane, PunganurTown Mandal, Chittoor District. ...PETITIONER AND 1. The State of Andhra Pradesh, Rep. by its Principal Secretary, Revenue Department, Secretariat Building, Velagapudi, Amaravati, Guntur District. 2. The District Collector, Chittoor District, Chittoor. 3. The Joint Collector, Chittoor, Chittoor District. 4. The Revenue Divisional Officer, Palamaner Division, Chittoor District. 5. The Tahsildar, Punganur Mandal, Chittoor District. ...RESPONDENTS Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court be pleased to issue a Writ Order direction more particularly one in the nature of WRIT OF MANDAMUS declaring the action of the Respondents in disposal of the Petitioners representation/application dt.26-10-2023 may seeking for deletion of his property for an extent of Ac.0-88 cents, situated in Survey No.294/4 and Ac.0-94 cents, situated in Survey No.294/5 of Ethuru Village, Punganuru Mandal, Chittoor District from prohibitory properties list maintained under Section 22A (1)(b) of Registration Act illegal, arbitrary, unjust, violation of fundamental rights guaranteed under Article 19, 21 and consequently direct the Respondents to dispose of the as Petitioners representation/application dt.26- 10-2023 by deleting his absolute property for an extent of Ac.0-88 cents, situated in Survey > No.294/4 and Ac.0-94 cents, situated in Survey No.294/5 of Ethuru Village, Punganuru Mandal, Chittoor District from prohibitory properties list maintained under Section 22A (1)(b) of Registration Act. lA NO: 1 OF 2025 Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to direct the Respondents to dispose of the Petitioner’s representation/application dt.26- 10-2023 seeking deletion of his absolute property for an extent of Ac.0-88 cents, situated in Survey No.294/4 and Ac.0-94 cents, situated in Survey No.294/5 of Ethuru Village, Pungan Mandal, Chittoor District from prohibitory properties list maintained under Section 22A (1)(b) of Registration Act. uru Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI A. SYAM SUNDAR REDDY Counsel for the Respondent Nos.1 to 5:SRI K. ARJUN CHOWDARY, AGP FOR REVENUE The Court made the following: ORDER \ [3328] APHC010003562025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) km THURSDAY ,THE NINTH DAY OF JANUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE GANNAMANENI RAMAKRISHNA PRASAD WRIT PETITION NO: 479/2025 Between: 1.GANGARAPU NAGESH BABU, S/0 VENKATAPPA, AGED ABOUT 52 YEARS, R/0 D.NO.27-136/5, POLICE LANE, PUNGANURTOWN MANDAL, CHITTOOR DISTRICT. ...PETITIONER AND 1.THE STATE OF AP, REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT BUILDING REVENUE VELAGAPUDI, AMARAVATI, GUNTUR DISTRICT. 2.THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, CHITTOOR DISTRICT, CHITTOOR. 3.THE JOINT COLLECTOR, CHITTOOR, CHITTOOR DISTRICT. 4.THE REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER, PALAMANER DIVISION, CHITTOOR DISTRICT. 5.THE TAHSILDAR, PUNGANUR MANDAL, CHITTOOR DISTRICT. ...RESPONDENT(S): Counsel for the Petitioner: 1 .A SYAM SUNDAR REDDY Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1.GP FOR REVENUE 2 The Court made the following: ORAL ORDER: Heard Sri A.Syam Sundar Reddy, learned Counsel for and Sri K.Arjun Chowdary, learned Assistant Government Pleader. Learned Counsel for the Petitioner has drawn the attention the Petitioner 2. of this Court Petitioner dated subject properties from the Prohibited Properties List under Section 22A(1)(b) of the Registration Act. 1908. to the Representation/Application submitted by the Writ 26.10.2023 (EX.P12) seeking deletion of the 3. Having perused the same, learned Assistant Government taken an objection stating that the Petitioner Application for consideration. Pleader has is required to make an Online 4. The objection raised by the learned Assistant Government cannot be entertained in as much has to be accepted by the Respondent Officials Pleader as the request of the citizen by any mode Making an Application through electronic mode is only an additional aid to the executive but it cannot method. However, if any fee has to be remitted along with Application, it shall be the ‘public duty' on the part of the executive to immediately inform the applicant/citize n be made compulsory without any other alternative to remit the sufficient fee. 5. A public servant is not permitted to allow an Application/Representation /Grievance/Complaint to gather dust by his/her inaction merely because such a thing has not been submitted in a prescribed form or format or that the 3 prescribed fee has not been remitted to the Government Exchequer. It is an indispensable and inseparable duty that is cast on the part of every public servant to inform such person to comply with the statutory requirement. If the inaction by a public servant has resulted in causing prejudice to a citizen, even if it is unintended, would still tantamount to “Malice in law” (legal malice) (Kalabharati Advertising Vs. Hemant Vimalnath Narichania & Ors.: (2010) 9 see 437-Paras-25 & 26;) Legal malice 25. The State is under obligation to act fairly without ill will or malice— in fact or in law. “Legal malice” or “malice in law” means something done without lawful excuse. It is an act done wrongfully and wilfully without reasonable or probable cause, and not necessarily an act done from ill feeling and spite. It is a deliberate act in disregard to the rights of others. Where malice is attributed to the State, it can never be a case ofpersonal ill will or spite on the part ofthe State. It is an act which is taken with an oblique or indirect object. It means exercise of statutory power for “purposes foreign to those for which it is in law intended”. It means conscious violation of the law to the prejudice of another, a depraved inclination on the part of the authority to disregard the rights of others, which intent is manifested by its injurious acts. Shiikla f(1976) 2 SCC 521 : AIR 1976 SC 1207] , SR. Venkataramanv. Union of India [(1979) 2 SCC 491 : 1979 SCC (L&S) 216 : AIR 1979 SC 49] , Slate of A.P. V. Goverdhanlal Pitti [(2003) 4 SCC 739 : AIR 2003 SC 1941] , BPL Ltd. v. S.P. Gururaja [(2003) 8 SCC 567] and .WB. SEBv. Dilip Kumar Ray [(2007) 14 SCC 568 : (2009) I SCC (L&S) 860].) 26. Passing an order for an unauthorised purpose constitutes malice in law. (Vide Punjab SEB Ltd. Zora . Singh [(2005) 6 SCC 776] and Union of India v. V. Ramakrishnan [(2005) 8 SCC 394 : 2005 SCC (L&S) 1150].) (Vide ADM, Jabalpur v. Shivakant 6. At the very outset, this Court has noticed that the Writ Petitioner had submitted a Representation/Application way back on 26.10.2023 (Ex.P.12) seeking deletion of the subject properties from the Prohibited Properties under Section 22A of the Registration Act, 1908 and the frozen without any response, one way or the other, for more than List same had been kept an year with District Collector (Respondent No.2). Therefore, inaction on the part of a public servant for the reasons indicated hitherto of the statutory duties which may lead to initiation of proceedings for dereliction of public duty. Having regard to the above facts, there shall be can tantamount to falling foul appropriate departmental 7. a direction to the District Collector (Respondent No.2) to consider the Representation/ Application dated 26.10.2023 (Ex.P12) and pass a Speaking Order in accordance with law within a period of fourteen weeks and communicate a copy of such Order to the Writ Petitioner forthwith. Needless to state that the Respondent No.2 is statutoriiy obligated to issue advance Notice to the Writ Petitioner and any other interested objections and documents, if Petitioner is directed to submit a parties, consider their submissions/ any, before passing the final Order. Writ copy of this Order along with photo copy of the Representation/Application (mentioned supra) to the Respondent No.2 Within one week from today for effective compliance. With these observations and directions 8. this Writ Petition stands disposed of. No order as to costs (• 5 Interlocutory Applications, if any, stand closed in terms of this order. S6I- B PRASADA RAO ASSISTANfr REGIST^ FICER 9. f i //TRUE COPY// SECm To, 1. The Principal Secretary, Revenue Department, State of Andhra Secretariat Building, Velagapudi, Amaravati, Guntur District Pradesh 2. The District Collector, Chittoor District, Chittoor. 3. The Joint Collector, Chittoor, Chittoor District. Divisional Officer, Palamaner Division, Chittoor District. 4. The Revenue 5. The Tahsildar, Punganur Mandal, Chittoor District. 6. One CC to Sri A. Syam Sundar Reddy, Advocate [OPUC] GP for Revenue, High Court of Andhra Pradesh. [OUT] 7. TwoCCsto 8. Three CD Copies. ssb HIGH COURT DATED;09/01/2025 ORDER WP.No.479 of 2025 2 3 JAN 2C25 .1^ \o Co/; ^ Current Section j. S£i.®f*ATCV'^ DISPOSING THE W.P. WITHOUT COSTS