APHC010409182021 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH (Special Original Jurisdiction) THURSDAY ,THE NINTH DAY OF JANUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE RAVI CHEEMALAPATI WRIT PETITION NO: 25133/2021 Between: Vasamsetti Venkayamma, State Of Andhra Pradesh and Others Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. Y SUDHAKAR Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. GP FOR REVENUE 2. BOLLA VENKATA RAMA RAO The Court made the following The case of the petitioner herein is that the petitioner is the absolute owner of the subject property i.e, to an extent of Ac.0.30 cents in R.S.No.293 2 situated at Tapeswararam Mandal, Mandapeta Mandal District and the said land was purchased through the registered sale deed from Vasamsetti Musalayya and his sons No.3387/1980 and got mutated pattadar passbook and title deed. The petitioner also executed gift settlement deed on 05.06.2017 vide document No.1186/2017 in favo 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) THURSDAY ,THE NINTH DAY OF JANUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE RAVI CHEEMALAPATI WRIT PETITION NO: 25133/2021 ...PETITIONER AND State Of Andhra Pradesh and Others ...RESPONDENT(S) Counsel for the Petitioner: Counsel for the Respondent(S): BOLLA VENKATA RAMA RAO The Court made the following Order: The case of the petitioner herein is that the petitioner is the absolute owner of the subject property i.e, to an extent of Ac.0.30 cents in R.S.No.293 2 situated at Tapeswararam Mandal, Mandapeta Mandal, East Godavari District and the said land was purchased through the registered sale deed samsetti Musalayya and his sons on 24.12.1980 vide Document and got mutated her name in the revenue records and obtained le deed. The petitioner also executed a on 05.06.2017 vide document No.1186/2017 in favo IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH [3332] THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE RAVI CHEEMALAPATI ...PETITIONER ...RESPONDENT(S) The case of the petitioner herein is that the petitioner is the absolute owner of the subject property i.e, to an extent of Ac.0.30 cents in R.S.No.293- , East Godavari District and the said land was purchased through the registered sale deed vide Document name in the revenue records and obtained a registered on 05.06.2017 vide document No.1186/2017 in favour of 2 her son by keeping life interest and giving absolute rights to her son after her demise. 2. 2. While so, the 6th respondent who is nephew of the petitioner in order to grab the property got created a will dated 02.09.1993 alleged to have been executed by Vasamsetti Musalayya, for an extent of Ac.0.40 cents in R.S.No.293-2 of Tapeswaram village. Basing on the said Will, he approached the 5th respondent and got mutated his name in the revenue records and obtained pattadar passbook and title deed in his name and by virtue of the same, without the petitioner’s knowledge he tried to interfere with petitioner’s possession. The petitioner got filed a suit in O.S.No.134 of 2021 on the file of Junior Civil Judge, Alamaru seeking permanent injunction restraining the 6th respondent and his henchmen from interfering with her peaceful possession and enjoyment of the same and also filed I.A for grant of ad-interim injunction and both are pending adjudication before the Junior Civil Judge, Alamaru. In the meanwhile, a representation was also made to the 3rd respondent on 20.07.2021 requesting to cancel the pattadar passbook and title deeds issued in favour of the 6th respondent for which the 5th respondent has issued an endorsement dated 31.08.2021 directing the petitioner to get the matter settled in the Court. Impugning the same, the present writ petition is filed. 03. Heard Sri Y.Sudhakar, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri J.Krishna Praneeth, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue and Sri Bolla Venkata Rama Rao, learned counsel for respondent No.6. 04. Learned counsel for the petitioner while reiterating the contents of the affidavit contended that, the subject land of the petitioner i.e., Ac.0.30 cents was never sub-divided at all. Now basing on the fabricated Will, the 6th respondent obtained pattadar passbook for an extent of Ac.0.40 cents and thereby trying to interfere with the petitioner’s property to an extent of Ac.0.30 cents. In view of the same, the petitioner was constrained to file civil suit. The 3 6th respondent has fraudulently obtained pattadar passbooks from the revenue authorities. A representation was also made to the Tahsildar, for which the Tahsildar has issued the impugned endorsement asking the petitioner to approach the competent civil court. The revenue authorities never followed the procedure contemplated under Andhra Pradesh Rights in Land and Pattadar Passbook Act, 1971 before issuing pattadar passbook in favor of the 6th respondent. When the land is not at all sub-divided, no reasons are coming forward as to how the pattadar passbook has been issued to the 6th respondent to an extent of Ac.0.40 cents by showing the Sy.No.293/2B2. If such endorsement subsists it affects the rights of the petitioner. Further the revenue authorities cannot ask the petitioner to go to civil court and they have to verify whether the pattadar passbook was issued in favour of the 6th respondent in a right perspective and inconsonance with the provisions of Act, 1971. Accordingly, prayed to pass appropriate orders, protecting the interest of the petitioner. 05. On the other hand, Sri Praneeth, learned Assistant Government Pleader on counter contended that, if at all the petitioner has any grievance against the issuance of pattadar passbook in favor of the 6th respondent, she has to approach Joint Collector. As there are civil disputes between the petitioner and 6th respondent, the Tahsildar has rightly directed the petitioner to approach the competent civil court to settle the dispute. The Tahsildar cannot adjudicate the grievance of the petitioner. There is neither illegality nor procedural irregularity in passing the said endorsement, the petitioner has not made out any case, warranting the interference of this court, and the writ petition is liable to be dismissed and prayed to dismiss the writ petition. 06. On the other hand, Sri Bolla Venkata Rama Rao, learned counsel for the 6th respondent on counter submitted that, the land in Sy.No.293/2 has been sub-divided, wherein the 6th respondent got the property to an extent of 4 Ac.0.40 cents by way of Will and accordingly basing on the said Will, the authorities have rightly issued pattadar passbook in his favour. The petitioner cannot assail the same before the Tahsildar by making representation. The petitioner has not made out any case warranting interference of this Court and if at all the petitioner has any right and title over the subject property, she has to ventilate her grievance before competent civil court and accordingly prayed to dismiss the writ petition. 07. Perused the material available on record and considered the submissions of the learned respective counsels. 08. The petitioner is claiming the property to an extent of Ac.0.30 cents in Sy.No.293/2, the pattadar passbook has also been issued by the revenue authorities under the guise of pattadar passbook issued in respect of the land to an extent of Ac.0.40 cents in Sy.No.293/2B2, when respondent No.6 is trying to interfere with the petitioner’s subject property, the petitioner was constrained to file a suit in O.S.No.134/2021 on the file of Junior Civil Judge, Alamaru seeking permanent injunction and the same is pending consideration. No doubt the pleadings shows that identification of the property is also in dispute and there are some civil disputes between the petitioner and also the 6th respondent who is none other than her nephew. When the revenue authority has given the pattadar passbook in favor of the 6th respondent, if the petitioner has any grievance, she has to approach the Joint Collector under Section 9 of A.P.Rights in Land and Pattadar Passbook Act, 1971 which reads as follows: “The Collector may either suo motu or on an application made to him, call for and examine the record of any Recording Authority, Mandal Revenue Officer or Revenue Divisional Officer under Sections 3, 5, 5A or 5B, in respect of any record of rights prepared or maintained to satisfy himself as to the regularity, correctness, legality or propriety of 5 any decision taken, order passed or proceedings made in respect thereof and if it appears to the Collector that any such decision, order or proceedings should be modified, annulled or reversed or remitted for reconsideration, he may pass orders accordingly” 09. By virtue of the said provision referred supra, if any individual has any grievance against the issuance of pattadar passbook he has to approach Joint Collector under section 9 of the Act, 1971, or before the competent civil court for declaration of title and he/she cannot claim rights before the revenue authorities. In the present case, the petitioner, instead of approaching Joint Collector against the issuance of pattadar passbook in favor of 6th respondent, she made a representation to the Tahsildar, the Tahsildar has issued impugned endorsement dated 31.08.2021 directing the petitioner to approach the competent civil court for declaration of her rights. It is the case of the petitioner that, she also approached the Joint Collector and made representation, basing on the representation, the endorsement was issued by the Tahsildar. The Joint Collector cannot refer the case to the Tahsildar, as he has no jurisdiction or authority to entertain the same. By virtue of Section 9 of the Act, the Joint Collector is the competent authority for adjudication on the pattadar passbooks issued in favor of the 6th respondent. To meet the ends of justice, this writ petition is disposed of by passing the following order: The petitioner is at liberty to approach the Joint Collector against the issuance of pattadar passbook infavor of the 6th respondent by virtue of Section 9 of Andhra Pradesh Rights in Pattadar passbook Act, 1971 if so advised. On such application, the joint collector shall decide the same by hearing all the parties concerned including the 6th respondent and pass a reasoned order and communicate the same as expeditiously as possible. 6 Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs. As a sequel thereto, miscellaneous petitions pending, if any shall stands closed. ____________________________ JUSTICE RAVI CHEEMALAPATI 09.01.2025 KKV 7 8 259 THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE RAVI CHEEMALAPATI WRIT PETITION NO.25133 of 2021 Dated: 09.01.2025 KKV 9 HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH Writ Petition No.25133 of 2021 PROCEEDING SHEET Sl. No. Date ORDER OFFICE NOTE 09.01.2025 RC, J The Writ petition is disposed of. (Vide Separate Order) ________ RC, J KKV 10