IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH :: AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) FRIDAY, THE FOURTEENTH DAY OF FEBRUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE NINALA JAYASURYA WRIT PETITION NO: 14345 OF 2016 Between: B Nageswara Reddy, S/o. B.P.Venkata Subba Reddy, Aged about 30 years, Occ: Agriculture, R/o. Abbipuram Village, Mahanandi Mandal, Kurnool District ...Petitioner AND 1. The State of Andhra Pradesh, Rep by its Principle Secretary, Revenue Department Secretariat Buildings, Hyderabad. The District Collector, Kurnool, Kurnool District. The Revenue Divisional Officer, Nandyal, Kurnool District. The Tahsildar, Mahanandi Mandal, Kurnool District R.Chandrapal Kumar, S/o. R.John, R/o.H.No.26/131, Gnanapuram, Nandyal Mandal, Kurnool District. 2. 3. 4. 5. ...Respondents 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 any writ, order or direction preferably in nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the respondents in not granting assignment in favour of the petitioner in respect of the land admeasuring an extent of Ac.2-64 cents in Sy.No. 547/B situated at Bukkapuram Village, Mahanandi Mandal, Kurnool District as illegal, arbitrary, violative of Articles 14, 21 and 300-A of the Constitution of India and consequently direct the respondents to dispose of the representation of the petitioner dated 03-03- 2014 by granting assignment in respect of the land admeasuring an extent of Ac. 1-18 cents in Sy.No. 547/B situated at Bukkapuram Village, Mahanandi Mandal, Kurnool District in favour of the petitioner. f I.A. NO: 3 OF 2016fWPMP. NO: 17876 OF 2016) 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 dispossess the petitioner from the land admeasuring an extent of Ac.2-64 cents in Sy.No. 547/B situated at Bukkapuram Village, Mahanandi Mandal, Kurnool District pending disposal of the Writ Petition. I.A. NO: 1 OF 2016(WVMP. NO: 1861 OF 20161 Between: R.Chandrapal Kumar, S/o. R.John, R/o.H.No.26/131, Gnanapuram, Nandyal Mandal, Kurnool District. ...Petitioner/5^'’ Respondent AND B Nageswara Reddy, S/o. B.P.Venkata Subba Reddy, Aged about 30 years, Occ: Agriculture, R/o. Abbipuram Village, Mahanandi Mandal, Kurnool District. The State of Andhra Pradesh, Rep by its Principle Secretary, Revenue Department Secretariat Buildings, Hyderabad. The District Collector, Kurnool, Kurnool District. The Revenue Divisional Officer, Nandyal, Kurnool District. The Tahsildar, Mahanandi Mandal, Kurnool District 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. ...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 vacate the interim order dated 26-04-2016 passed in W.P.MP. No. 17876 of 2016 in W.P. No. 14345 of 2016. LA. NO: 2 OF 2016(WVMP. NO: 2081 OF 2016) i Between; 1. The State of Andhra Pradesh, Rep by its Principle Secretary, Revenue Department Secretariat Buildings, Hyderabad. 2. The District Collector, Kurnool, Kurnool District. 3. The Revenue Divisional Officer, Nandyal, Kurnool District. 4. The Tahsildar, Mahanandi Mandal, Kurnool District. ...Petitioners/Respondents AND 1. B Nageswara Reddy, S/o. B.P.Venkata Subba Reddy, Aged about 30 years, Occ: Agriculture, R/o. Abbipuram Village, Mahanandi Mandal, Kurnool District. ...Respondent/Petitioner 2. R.Chandrapal Kumar, S/o. R.John, R/o.H.No.26/131, Gnanapuram, Nandyal Mandal, Kurnool District. ...Respondent/Respondent 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 vacate the interim order granted WPMP. No. 17876 of 2016 in WP. No. 14345 of 2016 dated 26-04-2016 and dismiss the writ petition. Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI V VINOD K REDDY Counsel for the Respondents: GP FOR ASSIGNMENT Counsel for the Respondents: GP FOR REVENUE Counsel for the Respondents: SRI AKKAM ESHWAR Counsel for the Respondents: SRI N. SRIRAMA MURTHY The Court made the following order: 1 APHC010579412016 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3209] FRIDAY ,THE FOURTEENTH DAY OF FEBRUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE NINALA JAYASURYA WRIT PETITION No: 14345 of 2016 Between: B.Nageswara Reddy ...PETITIONER AND The State of Andhra Pradesh, Rep. by its Principal Secretary, Revenue Department & 4 Others. ...RESPONDENTS Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. Mr.V.VINOD K REDDY Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. GP FOR ASSIGNMENT (AP) 2.GP FOR REVENUE (AP) S.Mr.AKKAM ESHWAR 4.Mr.N.SRIRAM MURTHY 2 The Court made the following Order: f Heard learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard learned Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue appearing on behalf of the respondents 1 to 4 and learned counsel for the respondent, who appeared through on line. 2. The present writ petition is filed seeking the following relief: “ to issue any writ, order or direction preferably in nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the respondents in not granting assignment in favour of the petitioner in respect of the land admeasuring an extent of Ac.2.64 cents in Sy.No.547/B situated at Bukkapuram Village, Mahanandi Mandal, Kurnool District as illegal, arbitrary, violative of Articles 14, 21 and 300-A of the Constitution of India and consequently direct the respondents to dispose of the representation of the petitioner dated 03.03.2014 by granting assignment in respect of the land admeasuring an extent of Ac.1.18 cents in Sy.No.547/B situated at Bukkapuram Village, Mahanandi Mandal, Kurnool District in favour of the petitioner and pass such other order or orders as may deem fit and proper in the facts and circumstance of the case.” The learned counsel for the petitioner made submissions with reference to the averments made in the affidavit to the effect that the petitioner is in occupation of land admeasuring Ac.2.64 cents in Sy.No.547/B of Bukkapuram Village for more than a decade. He submits that the petitioner is cultivating the said land by raising various crops and as he is a landless poor person, entitled to get DKT patta from the Government. He submits that the petitioner made an application to the 4**^ respondent seeking to grant assignment of the above said extent of land in favour of the petitioner and the Mandal Revenue Inspector submitted a report dated 19.01.2008 in that regard that the petitioner is in possession of the subject matter property and entitled to DKT patta. 3. While so, the learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the unofficial respondent No.5 was making false claims in respect of the subject matter land , raising a dispute and in those circumstances, the petitioner made a representation dated 03.03.2014 reiterating his request for assignment of the subject matter land in favour of the petitioner. He submits that as the said representation did not yield any result, the petitioner was constrained to file the present writ petition. 4. The learned Assistant Government Pleader, on the other hand, made submissions with reference to the counter-affidavit filed along with the vacate stay petition. He submits that the 5**^ respondent is an Ex-service man and land i.e., Ac.3.40 cents in Survey No.547/B1 and Ac. 1.60 cents in Survey No.549/2 of Bukkapuram village was assigned to the 5*^ respondent vide DKT patta in R.Dis.No.368/2002 dt.26.09.2002 and pattadar pass books and title deeds were also issued in his favour. He further submits that as per the enquiries conducted by the revenue officials, the petitioner is not in possession and enjoyment of the subject matter land and further that application as stated by the petitioner is pending consideration for assignment. In this regard, the learned Assistant Government Pleader had drawn attention of this Court to Para No.9, which reads as follows; no the “9. In Reply to Para No.8 of the affidavit, it is submitted that as per record, and enquiry it is revealed that the petitioner is not in possession and enjoyment of the petition schedule land. So dispossession of the petitioner does not arise from the land admeasuring an extent of Ac.2.64 cents in Sy.No.547/B situated Bukkapuram Village, Mahanandi Mandal, Kurnool District. No application filed by the petitioner before this office for assignment is pending. The writ petitioner is ffif- 4 4% not in possession of land Ac.2.64 cents in Sy.No.547/B and no land is available in Sy.No.547/B. The petitioner is residing with his father and their family is having Ac.6.22 cents of land and the petitioner as well as his father are not eligible for assignment since they are not landless poor. The petitioner is also working as fair price shop dealer.” The learned counsel for the 5^^ respondent made submissions with 5. reference to the material filed along with the counter-affidavit more particularly the DKT patta dated 26.09.2002 assigning an extent of Ac.3.40 cents in X V Sy.No.547/B1 and Ac.1.60 cents in Sy.No.549/2 as also the relevant notices • issued by the concerned Gram Panchayat. He had also drawn the attention of this Court to Para No.5 of the affidavit and contended that the petitioner with a malafide intention to grab the subject matter land had resorted to illegal methods and in fact the petitioner and his father, who is the writ petitioner in W.P.No. 14334 of 2016 in possession of an extent of Ac.20.00 of dry land and not eligible for any assignment of the Government land. While contending that there are no merits in the writ petition, he seeks dismissal of the writ petition. This Court has considered the submissions made and perused the material on record. At the outset, it may be pertinent to mention that the official as well as the unofficial respondents filed counter-affidavits along with the vacate stay petitions in the year 2016. No reply-affidavits denying the specific allegations made in the counters have been filed and thus the specific assertions made in the counter affidavits referred to above have remained un- 6. rebutted. 5 •40 1. In view of the same, this Court is inclined to dismiss the writ petition. The interim order granted on 26.04.2016 stands vacated. No order costs. as to As a sequel, all the pending miscellaneous applications, if any, shall stand closed. Sd/- M SRINIVAS T REGISTRAR OFFICER ASSISTAN //TRUE COPY// To / 1. One CC to Sri V Vinod K Reddy, Advocate 2. One CC to Sri Akkam Eshwar, Advocate 3. One CC to Sri N. Srirama Murthy, Advocate [OPUC] [OPUC] [OPUC] of Andhra Pradesh. [OUT] High Court of Andhra Pradesh. [OUT] 4. Two CCs to GP for Assignment, High Court 5. Two CCs to GP for Revenue 6. Three CD Copies RAM HIGH COURT DATED:14/02/2025 ORDER ANO^ g 13 MAR 2C:3 I Current Section .^ CJ WP.No.14345of2016 DISMISSING THE WP WITHOUT COSTS