APHC010492272025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3330] FRIDAY, THE NINETEENTH DAY OF SEPTEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE TARLADA RAJASEKHAR RAO WRIT PETITION No. 25701 of 2025 Between: 1. GOTTIPATI VEDAVYAS, S/O, LATE G.RAGHAVA RAO, AGED ABOUT 34 YEARS, OCC BUSINESS, R/O. GOTTIPATIVARI VEEDI, NEAR RAMALAYAM, PASUMARRU RURAL, CHILAKALURIPETA MANDAL, PALNADU DISTRICT, STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH. ...PETITIONER AND 1. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, REVENUE DEPARTMENT SECRETARIAT, VELAGAPUDI, AMARAVATHI. 2. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, PALNADU DISTRICT AT NARASARAOPETA. 3. JOINT COLLECTOR, PALNADU DISTRICT AT NARASARAOPETA. 4. THE REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER, CHILAKALURI PETA MANDAL, PALNADU DISTRICT. 5. THE TAHSILDAR, CHILAKALURIPETA MANDAL, PALNADU DISTRICT. ...RESPONDENT(S): 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 one in the nature of WRIT OF MANDAMUS aggrieved by the in action of respondents particularly 2nd respondent are not considering my applications No. TATTA012500128967, Dt. 29.03.2025 and application No. TATTA012500131734, Dt.04.07.2025 submitted for Removal of 22- A Prohibited List submitted for deleting petitioners agricultural land from 2 22.A Prohibition list is in Survey Nos. 337/1, Ac. 2.77 cents and Survey No. 337/2B, Ac. 4.77 cents, Khata No. 2982, Pasumarru Village, Chilakaluripeta Mandal, Palnadu District, as being illegal, irregular. irrational and violative of Article 14, 21 and 300-A of Constitution of India . Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. PANGA SIVANARAYANA Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. GP FOR REVENUE The Court made the following: 3 ORDER: The present Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking the following relief: “…to issue a writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of WRIT OF MANDAMUS aggrieved by the inaction of respondents particularly 2nd respondent are not considering petitioner applications No.TATTA012500128967, Dt.29.03.2025 and application No.TATTA012500131734, Dt.04.07.2025 submitted for Removal of 22-A Prohibited List submitted for deleting petitioners agricultural land from 22.A Prohibition list is in Survey Nos.337/1, Ac.2.77 cents and Survey No.337/2B, Ac.4.77 cents, Khata No.2982, Pasumarru Village, Chilakaluripeta Mandal, Palnadu District, as being illegal, irregular, irrational and violative of Article 14, 21 and 300-A of Constitution of India and pass such other orders…” 2. The petitioner contends that the settlement officer in Eluru issued a settlement patta in favor of the petitioner’s grandfather, Gottipati Yagnanarayana, subsequently the partition took place, vide document No.7376 of 2009, dated 29.10.2009, at the Sub-Registrar Office in Chilakaluripeta, concerning the scheduled property. Since the grant of patta, the petitioner’s father, Sri Gottipati Veera Rahava Rao, son of Yagnanarayana, has been continued in the possession, and the petitioner asserts that he is now in effective possession and enjoyment of the scheduled property. 3. Notwithstanding the same, the said schedule agricultural land was placed under the prohibitory list under Section 22A of the Registration Act, vide Memo No.E1/211/2019, dated 13.02.2019, without any notice. The petitioner contends that the said action of the respondents in placing the land under the prohibitory list is arbitrary and 4 illegal. In order to ventilate his grievance, the petitioner submitted Application No.TATTA012500128967 dated 29.03.2025, and Application No.TATTA012500131734 dated 04.07.2025 before the respondent-authorities. However, no action has been taken on the said representations despite several requests and as there has been no further response, the petitioner has approached this Court seeking appropriate relief. 4. Heard learned counsel for petitioner and learned Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue for respondents. 5. Learned counsel for petitioner submits that it would suffice to direct the respondent authorities to consider the application vide application No.TTA012400122077 dated 09.10.2024, submitted by the petitioner. 6. Learned Assistant Government Pleader would submit that petitioner’s application will be considered and appropriate orders be passed in accordance with law. 7. As agreed by learned counsels for the respective parties and after going through the records, this Court, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, is inclined to dispose of the Writ Petition at the admission stage as there is no meaning in keeping the writ petition pending for an innocuous relief directing the concerned respondent to consider and address the either of the petitioner’s Application No.TATTA01255500128967 dated 29.03.2025 or Application No.TATTA01255500131734 dated 04.07.2025 in accordance with law 5 and communicate the decision at the earliest possible, not later than three months from the date of production of copy of this order. 8. With the above direction, the Writ Petition is disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs. As a sequel thereto, Interlocutory Applications pending, if any, shall stand closed. __________________________________ JUSTICE TARLADA RAJASEKHAR RAO Date: 19.09.2025 siva 6 THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE TARLADA RAJASEKHAR RAO WRIT PETITION No.25701 of 2025 Date: 19.09.2025 siva