V, IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH :: AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) MONDAY, THE TENTH DAY OF FEBRUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE RAVI CHEEMALAPATI WRIT PETITION NO: 31173 OF 2021 Between: Mamanduru Polireddy, S/o. Linga Reddy, aged about 48 Years, R/o Pagali Village, Yerpedu Post and Mandal, Chittoor District ...PETITIONER(S) AND 1. The State of Andhra Pradesh, rep., by its Principal Secretary, Revenue Department, (LAND ACQUISITION), Secretariat, Velagapudi, Amaravati Capital City, Guntur District. 2. The District Collector, Chittoor District, Chittoor. 3. The Joint Collector, Chittoor. 4. The Revenue Divisional Officer, Tirupathi, Chittoor District. 5. The Tahsildar, Sri Kalahasti Mandal, Sri Kalahasti, Chittoor District. ...RESPONDENTS ^ Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India is filed praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased to issue an appropriate Writ, Order or Direction more particularly in the nature of WRIT OF MANDAMUS declaring the action of the Respondents in not paying Exgratia to the petitioner parwith Patta holder for the land proposed to be acquired for the purpose of the providing house sites under Navaratnalu-Pedalandariki Hlu and further trying to resume the land in an extent of Ac. 2-99 cts in Sy. No. 365/2 and Ac 1-96 cts in Sy. No. 370/1 in Urunduru Village, Srikalahasti Mandal, Chittoor District without considering the case of the Petitioner under Section 3(5) the Andhra Pradesh Assigned (Lands Prohibition of on Transfer) Act 1977, and the order Roc. A/138/2020 dated 30.11.2020 of Respondent, as arbitrary, illegal, in violation of Article 14, 21 and 300A of the Constitution of India and in violation of the Provisions of The Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013 and contrary to the Judgment of this Honble Court RDO Chevella and others Vs. Mekala Pandu 2004 (2) ALT 546 and consequently direct the respondents to pay the compensation to the petitioner on par with patta holders in terms of the Judgment of this Honble Court in RDO Chevella and others Vs. Mekala Pandu others 2004 (2) ALT 546 forthwith. (Prayer is amended in Writ petition and affidavit as per the C.O.dt. 10.07.2024 vide orders passed in I.A. 02 of 2022.) lA NO: 1 OF 2022 Between: 1. The State of Andhra Pradesh, rep., by its Principal Secretary, Revenue Department, (LAND ACQUISITION), Secretariat, Velagapudi, Amaravati Capital City, Guntur District. 2. The District Collector, Chittoor District, Chittoor. 3. The Joint Collector, Chittoor. 4. The Revenue Divisional Officer, Tirupathi, Chittoor District. 5. The Tahsildar, Sri Kalahast! Mandal, Sri Kalahasti, Chittoor District ...PETITIONERS/RESPONDENTS the 5th / AND Mamanduru Polireddy, S/o. Linga Reddy, aged about 48 Years, R/o Pagali Village, Yerpedu Post and Mandal, Chittoor District ...RESPONDENT/PETITIONER Petition under Section 151 CPC is filed 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 passed in WP.No.31173/2021 dated 6.1.2022. lA NO: 1 OF 2021 Petition under Section 151 CPC is filed 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 disposses the petitioner from the possession and enjoyment of the agricultural land to an extent of Ac.2-99 Cts in Sy.No.365/2 and Ac.1-96 Cts in Sy.No.370/1 in Urunduru Village, Srikalahasti Mandal, Chittoor District pending disposal of the above Writ Petition. Counsel for the Petitioner :SRI. A RAJENDRA BABU Counsel for the Respondent No’s. 1 to 5: GP FOR REVENUE -- The Court made the following ORDER: 'W.(P.9io.31173 of2021 1 APHC010511832021 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3332] MONDAY ,THE TENTH DAY OF FEBRUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE RAVI CHEEMALAPATI WRIT PETITION NO: 31173/2021 Between: ...PETITIONER Mamanduru Polireddy AND ...RESPONDENT(S) The State Of Andhra Pradesh and Others Counsel for the Petitioner: 1.ARAJENDRA BABU Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1.GP FOR REVENUE The Court made the following: ORDER The grievance of the petitioner is that the respondents are not paying exgratia to his land in an extent of Ac.2-99 cents in Survey No.365/2 and Ac. 1-96 cents in Survey No.370/1 of Urunduru Village, Srikalahasti Mandal, Chittoor District, in terms of the judgment of this Court in Revenue Divisional Officer, Cheveiia ancLpthers vs. Mekaia Pandu (2004(2)ALT m3 .W<PMo.31173 of2021 546) and moreover the respondent no.5 passed order in Roc.A/138/2020, dated 30.11.2020 resuming the subject land to the Government for public purpose i.e., for issue of House site pattas under Navaratnalu-Pedalandariki Illu programme. 2. Heard Sri A.Rajendra Babu, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri K.Venkata Narayana, learned Assistant Government Pleader. 3. Sri A.Rajendra Babu, learned counsel, while reiterating the contents of the writ affidavit would contend that the subject land was assigned to one P.V.Mahalingam and to meet financial necessities, the said Mahalingam sold the subject property for valuable consideration under an unregistered sale deed in favour of the petitioner and ever since the petitioner has been in possession and enjoyment of the same and thereafter he made an application with a request to regularize his possession and enjoyment of the land as he is eligible for regularization under the provisions of Section 3(5) of the Andhra Pradesh Assigned Lands (Prohibition of Transfers) Act, 1977 and the same is pending consideration. The learned counsel for the petitioner would further contend that proceedings of respondent no.2 dated 30.11.2019, the pursuant to respondent no.5 vide letter dated 26.06.2020 identified the subject land for acquisition for allotment of house sites wherein the possession and enjoyment 'W.(P.9{o.31173of2021 of the petitioner over the subject property was mentioned. In view of the pronouncement in The Revenue Divisional Officer, Chevella vs. Mekala Pandu- 2004(2) ALT, 546, the petitioner is entitled for exgratia amount on par with the original pattadar and further as per G.O.Ms.No.243, Revenue (Land Acquisition) Department, dated 27.03.2010 also the petitioner is entitled for payment of compensation. However, the respondent considering the observations made in the above referred decision and the contents of the Government Order, directed respondent no.4 to take necessary action for resumption of the subject property. Pursuantly, the respondent no.5 issued proceedings in Roc.A/138/2020, dated 30.11.2020 resuming the subject land along with other lands to the government for the purpose of allotment of house sites. The said action of the respondent is highly illegal, arbitrary. Accordingly, prayed to allow the writ petition. 4. On the other hand, the learned Assistant Government Pleader, while reiterating the contents of the counter-affidavit and additional counter affidavit, would submit that, admittedly, the petitioner purchased the land assigned to his vendor in contravention of the provisions of the Andhra Pradesh Assigned Lands (Prohibition of Transfer) Act, 1977 and hence he is not covered by the judgment relied on by him and also the Government Order referred to by him and therefore, he is not entitled for any compensation or no.2, without .WcPMoJllTJ of2021 ^ ^ exgratia. Further, the petitioner, without approaching the authorities by making a representation, straight away filed the writ petition and therefore, this writ petition is not maintainable and the same is liable to be dismissed. 5. In reply, learned counsel for the petitioner sought liberty of this Court to submit a representation to the authorities for redressal of his grievance. 6. Perused the material available on record and considered the submissions made by the learned counsel for the parties. 7. Even according to the petitioner, he purchased the land assigned to his vendor under an unregistered sale deed. According to him, since he is a bona fide purchaser, he made an application to the authorities to regularize his sale and so far the authorities did not take any steps in that direction. Admittedly, the petitioner did not approach the authorities requesting them to redress his grievance for payment of exgratia for the assigned land purchased by him as per Mekala Pandu's case since the same is proposed to be acquired by the government. 8. It is fairly settled that a person cannot file a writ petition in court without first attempting to exhaust all available administrative remedies by approaching the relevant authorities to address their grievance. In the instance case, the petitioner did not try to resolve the issue within the .W<P.!Nb.31173of2021 ' it 5 administrative system before resorting to a writ petition. Therefore, as rightly contended by the learned Assistant Government Pleader, this writ petition is not maintainable. 9. It is relevant here to note that this Court vide orders dated 06.01.2022 granted status quo for a period of six weeks and the same is extended until further orders vide orders dated 13.07.2022. 10. As stated supra, the learned counsel for the petitioner sought liberty of this Court to approach the authorities to get his grievance. 11. In view of the above, this writ petition is disposed of, granting liberty to the petitioner to approach the authorities concerned by making representation and enclosing all the necessary documents in support of his claim, within a period of two (02) weeks from the date of receipt of copy of this order. On such, the authorities shall dispose of the said representation considering the documents, if any, filed by the petitioner, and further keeping in view the observations made in the decision in Revenue Divisional Officer, Chevella vs. Mekala Pandu and G.O.Ms.No.243, Revenue (Land Acquisition) Department, dated 27.03.2010, within a period of three (03) months from the date of receipt of the representation. Till such exercise, the authorities shall not interfere with the possession and enjoyment of the petitioner over the subject property, except under due process of law. In case .W(P.!Nb.31173of2021 6 the petitioner fails to submit any representation, the authorities are not precluded from taking steps as per law. There shall be no order as to costs. Pending miscellaneous applications, if any, shall stand closed. Sd/- B CHITTI JOSEPH ASSISTANT REGiSTRAR //TRUE COPY// SECTION OFFICER To, 1. The Principal Secretary, Revenue Department, (LAND ACQUISITION), State of Andhra Pradesh, Secretariat, Velagapudi, Amaravati Capital City, Guntur District. 2. The District Collector, Chittoor District, Chittoor. 3. The Joint Collector, Chittoor. 4. The Revenue Divisional Officer, Tirupathi, Chittoor District. 5. The Tahsildar, Sri Kalahasti Mandal, Sri Kalahasti, Chittoor District 6. OneCCto SRI. A RAJENDRA BABU, Advocate [OPUC] 7. Two CCS to GP FOR REVENUE, High Court Of Andhra Pradesh. [OUT] 8. Three CD Copies PRK HIGH COURT DATED:10/02/2025 ORDER WP.No.31173 of 2021 0 7 MAR 2025 X *3-^ . Curreiii odciiuit . DISPOSING OF THE W.P. WITHOUT COSTS