IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH :: AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) THURSDAY, THE TWENTIETH DAY OF FEBRUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE RAVI CHEEMALAPATI WRIT PETITION NO: 30865 OF 2022 Between: 1. Y Chandra Reddy, S/o late Y. Gangi Reddy, Aged about 75 years, R/o. Kothapalli, H/o Doddipalli, Filer Mandal, Annamayya District. 2. R. Lakshmidevi, W/o Ram Konda Reddy, Aged about 60 years, R/o. Kothapalli, H/o Doddipalli, Filer Mandal, Annamayya District. 3. Y. Ramanarayana Reddy, S/o Late Venkat Reddy, Aged about 65 years, R/o. Kothapalli, H/o Doddipalli, Filer Mandal, Annamayya District. ...Petitioners AND 1. The State of Andhra Pradesh, Rep. by its Principal Secretary, Revenue Department, Secretariat, Velagapudi, Amaravathi, Guntur District. 2. The District Collector, Annamayya District, Rayachoty. 3. The Revenue Divisional Officer, Rayachoty, Annamayya District. 4. The Tahsildar, Filer Mandal, Annamayya District. 5. G. Mukesh Kumar Reddy, S/o Sri. C. Sreeramulu, aged about 32 ;; R/o 441/32, 2"^^ Cross, Wilson Garden, Bangalore South, Bengaluru, Karnataka State 560027. (R5 is impleaded as per the court’s order dt. 20.02.25 in lA No. 1/24 in writ petition and affidavit) years. ...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 of mandamus or any other appropriate writ order may or direction declaring the highhanded action of the respondents in interfering with our rights and possession over the land in an extent Ac. 1.50 cents in Sy.No.1954, Ac.0.75 cents in Sy.No. 1954/9 and Ac.0.50 cents in Sy.No.1954/8 situated at Kothapalli village fields, H/o Doddipalli, Filer Mandal, Annamayya District as arbitrary, illegal and contrary to well established principles apart from being violative of fundamental constitutional rights guaranteed to us under Articles, 14, 19 and 21 of the Constitution of India and consequently direct the interfere with our rights and possession over the land in an extent Ac.1.50 cents in Sy.No.1954, Ac.0.75 cents in Sy.No.1954/9 and Ac.0.50 cents in Sy.No. 1954/8 situated at Kothapalli village fields Mandal, Annamayya District. and respondents not to H/o Doddipalli, Filer lA NO: 1 OF 2022 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 not to interfere with our rights and possession over the land in an extent Ac.1.50 cents in Sy.No.1954, Ac.0.75 cents in Sy.No.1954/9 and Ac.0.50 cents in Sy.No. 1954/8 situated at Kothapalli village fields, H/o Doddipalli, Filer Mandal Annamayya District without following due process of law, pending disposal of the writ petition. lA NO: 2 OF 207d 1. G. Mukesh Kumar Reddy, S/o Sri. C. Sreeramulu ... nH , aged about 32 years, o 441/32, 2 Cross, Wilson Garden, Bangalore South, Bengaluru Karnataka State 560027. ...Petitioner/ Implead Respondent NO. 5 2. Y Chandra Reddy, S/o late Y. Gang! Reddy, Aged about 75 years, R/o. Kothapalli, H/o Doddipalli, Filer Mandal, Annamayya District. 3. R. Lakshmidevi, W/o Ram Konda Reddy, Aged about 60 years, R/o. Kothapalli, H/o Doddipalli, Filer Mandal, Annamayya District. 4. Y. Ramanarayana Reddy, S/o Late Venkat Reddy, Aged about 65 years, R/o. Kothapalli, H/o Doddipalli, Filer Mandal, Annamayya District. . .Respondent/petitioners in WP AND 1. The State of Andhra Fradesh, Rep. by its Frincipal Secretary, Revenue Department, Secretariat, Velagapudi, Amaravathi, Guntur District. 2. The District Collector, Annamayya District, Rayachoty. 3. The Revenue Divisional Officer, Rayachoty, Annamayya District. 4. The Tahsildar, Filer Mandal, Annamayya District. ...Respondents in WP 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 vacate the orders dated 22-09-2022 passed in I.A.No.1 of 2022 in W.P.No.30865 of 2022 passed by this Ho’ble Court while W.P.No.30865 of2022. dismissing the - lA NO: 3 OF 2024 The Tahsildar, Filer Mandal, Annamayya District. ...Petitioners AND 1. Y Chandra Reddy, S/o late Y. Gangi Reddy, Aged about 75 Kothapalli, H/o Doddipalli, Filer Mandal, Annamayya District. 2. R. Lakshmidevi, W/o Ram Konda Reddy, Aged about 60 Kothapalli, H/o Doddipalli, Filer Mandal, Annamayya District. 3. Y. Ramanarayana Reddy, S/o Late Venkat Reddy, Aged years, R/o. Kothapalli, H/o Doddipalli, Filer Mandal, Annamayya District. ...Respondents/ petitioners years, R/o. years, R/o. about 65 f' 4. The State of Andhra Pradesh, Rep. by its Principal Secretary, Revenue Department, Secretariat, Velagapudi, Amaravathi, Guntur District. 5. The District Collector, Annamayya District, Rayachoty. 6. The Revenue Divisional Officer, Rayachoty, Annamayya District. (Respondent Nos. 4 to 6 formal party in this petition) ...Respondents/Respondents 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 vacate the Interim order dated 22.09.2024 passed in W.P.No. 30865 of 2022 and dismiss the writ petition. Counsel for the Petitioners: SRI. NAIDU SIVA RAMA KRISHNA Counsel for the Respondent Nos. 1 to 4: GP FOR REVENUE Counsel for the Respondent No. 5: SRI V SURENDRA REDDY The Court made the following order: APHC010503462022 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3332] THURSDAY, THE TWENTIETH DAY OF FEBRUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE RAVI CHEEMALAPATI WRIT PETITION NO: 30865/2022 Between; ...PETITIONER(S) Y Chandra Reddy and others AND ...RESPONDENT(S) The State of AP and others Counsel for the Petitioner(S); 1.NAIDU SIVA RAMA KRISHNA Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1.GP FOR REVENUE The Court made the following order: The grievance of the petitioners, in short, is that without following due process of law, the respondent authorities are interfering with their rights and possession over the land to an extent of Ac. 1.50 cents in survey No.1954, Ac.0.75 cents in survey No.1954/9 and Ac.0.50 cents in survey No.1954/8 situated at Kothapalli village fields, H/o Doddipalli, Piler Mandal, Annamayya District. 'I 2 *» 2. Heard Sri Sasidhar Reddy, learned counsel representing Sri Naidu Sivaram Krishna, learned counsel for the petitioners, Sri Venkata Satyanarayana, learned Assistant Government Pleader for official respondents and Sri V.Surendra Reddy, learned counsel representing Sri A.P.Reddy, learned counsel for unofficial respondent. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioners in elaboration to what has been stated in the writ affidavit contended that as the petitioners were landless poor, the subject land was assigned to them by way of DKT patta dated 23.06.2003 and since then they have been doing agricultural operations. The Revenue authorities after considering their possession and enjoyment over the subject land, have mutated their names in the revenue records and they were issued pattadar pass books, title deeds and 1B Adangals for the subject lands. He further submitted that recently the revenue authorities have come to the subject property on various occasions and threatened them to vacate from the land without assigning any reasons. When the petitioners approached the respondent authorities and brought to their notice that they were granted D-form pattas, the respondent authorities are insisting them to vacate the subject land. Aggrieved by the same, the present Writ Petition is filed and this Court vide order dated 22.09.2022 granted interim order directing the respondents not to interfere with the possession of the petitioners over the subject land without following the due process of law. As such, prayed to pass orders treating the interim order as final order. On the other hand, learned Assistant Government Pleader, while reiterating the contents of the counter affidavit of respondent No.4, contended that the land measuring total extent of Ac.25.46 cents in survey No.1954 is originally Government land classified as 'Un-Assessed Waste Dry (Gayalu) as and Re-settlement Register of Doddipalle village. As could be 4. per Re-survey from the records available in the office of respondent No.4, no such seen D-Form pattas were issued in favour of the petitioners for the subject land. As from ROR 1-B Register of Doddipalle village, there are no entries with regard to the subject property. He further submitted that a notice dated has been issued to the writ petitioners to attend before the Tahsidlar with supporting documents and accordingly, the writ petitioners have attended enquiry and after due enquiry, the documents submitted by the petitioners in support of subject lands are found as fake and fabricated. As such, prayed to dismiss the Writ Petition. seen 31.12.2022 Learned counsel for the unofficial respondent while reiterating the of the counter submitted that originally the land to an extent of No.1954/9 and Ac.1.00 cents in survey No.1954/8 of 5. contents Ac.1.50 cents in survey Doddipalli Revenue village belongs to Sri G.Venkata Ramana Reddy, who vide D-Form patta dated 14.12.2007 under acquired the said land quota and after his death, the legal heirs of Venkata Ramana said land through registered sale deed to the unofficial F-line application, the unofficial ex-servicemen Reddy sold the respondent and subsequently basing on respondent’s name was mutated in the revenue records. As such, prayed to pass orders protecting his interest. 6. Perused the record and considered the submissions made by learned counsel for the parties. 7. The petitioners are claiming the subject property by way of patta issued in their favour. To show their possession over the property, they filed D-form pattas. Form 1-B and pattadar passbooks with regard to subject property. In the counter, the Tahsildar has categorically stated that the D-form pattas produced by the petitioners before this Court are fake and fabricated documents. The unofficial respondent is claiming part of the subject property by way of sale deed. Initially, this Court granted interim direction to the respondents not to dispossess the petitioners and not to interfere with the possession of the petitioners over the subject land without following the due process of law pending further orders. 8. As stated supra, the stand of the revenue authorities is that the pattas produced by the petitioners are fake and fabricated. In the counter affidavit of the Tahsildar, nowhere it spelt out as to how the same was discovered by the revenue authorities. Further, it is not clearly mentioned how the respondent authorities came to the conclusion that the pattas are fake and fabricated. If the said pattas are not genuine, a duty is cast upon the authorities to explain to this Court as to how the pattas are not genuine. In the absence of any such pleading or proof, this Court cannot accept the contention of the revenue authorities that the pattas produced by the petitioners are fake and fabricated. In these circumstances, the contention of learned counsel for the petitioners cannot be brushed away. 9. Further, the Pattadar Pass books were also issued in favour of the petitioners and their names were also found in adangal as pattadars. There is no specific answer on the said documents by the respondents. In view of the material available on record and for the reasons stated supra, the petitioners' documents cannot be thrown away at this stage under Writ Jurisdiction. The unofficial respondent is claiming Ac.2.50 cents in survey No. 1954/8 & 1954/9, whereas the petitioner is claiming Ac.0.75 cents in survey No.1954/9 and Ac.0.50 cents in survey No.1954/8. No document is placed record as to what extent of land is available in the said survey number. In the said circumstances, this Court cannot grant any relief to the unofficial respondent. If at all, the unofficial respondent has any grievance, he has to approach appropriate forum. 10. on ( 11. In view of the above and taking the submissions of learned counsel for the parties into consideration, this Court is of the opinion that by merely raising a plea of a fake and fabricated pattas, the petitioners’ case cannot be dismissed. In view of the same, this Court is inclined to dispose of the Writ Petition by passing the following order: The respondent authorities are directed not to interfere with the possession of the petitioners over the subject property i.e., 6 Ac.2.50 cents in survey No.44/6 of Pasumanda village, Gudipala Mandal, Chittoor District, except under due process of law. However, it is made clear that if the respondent authorities are still of the opinion that the pattas are fake, they are always at liberty to initiate appropriate action in accordance with law. The petitioners have to put on notice and given an opportunity to defend their case. The unofficial respondent is at liberty to approach the competent Civil Court, if he has title dispute with regard to the subject property. 12. Accordingly, the Writ Petition is disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs. As a sequel thereto, interlocutory applications pending, if any in the Writ Petition, shall also stand closed. deputy" gistrar //TRUE COPY// To, SECTION OFFICER State of AP, Secretariat, 2. The District Collector, 3. The Revenue Divisional 4. The Tahsildar, Filer Mandal 5. One CC to Sri Naidu 6- OneCCtoSriVSurendra, T. Two CCS to GP for Revenue 8. Three CD Copies GSC Annamayya District Rayachoty. Officer, Rayachoty, Annamayy . Annamayya District. a District. Siva Rama Krishna Advocate fOPUCJ Reddy Advocate fOPUCJ . High Court of Andhra Pradesh fOUT] HIGH COURT DATED:20/02/2025 ORDER WP.No.30865 of 2022 OF AND/^ & ^ 18 MAR 2C25 ^ . Current Section -i-: DISPOSING OF THE WP WITHOUT COSTS