1 APHC010022722025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3328] TUESDAY ,THE TWENTY FIRST DAY OF JANUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE GANNAMANENI RAMAKRISHNA PRASAD WRIT PETITION NO: 1382/2025 Between: 1. NARAGONDIA VENUGOPAL, S/O RANGAIAH, AGED ABOUT 51 YEARS, R/O D.NO.7-33, C.VENGANNAPALLI VILLAGE, PUTLUR MANDAL, ANANTHAPUR DISTRICT ...PETITIONER AND 1. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, REVENUE DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT BUILDING, VELAGAPUDI, AMARAVATI, GUNTUR DISTRICT. 2. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, ANANTHAPUR DISTRICT, ANANTHAPUR. 3. THE REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER, ANANTHAPUR DIVISION, ANANTHAPUR DISTRICT. 4. THE TAHSILDAR, PUTLUR MANDAL, ANANTHAPUR DISTRICT. 5. AMBATI BHUPAL REDDY, S/O RANGA REDDY, AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS, R/O CHENAGALAGUDURU VILLAGE, PUTLUR MANDAL, ANANTHAPUR DISTRICT. ...RESPONDENT(S): Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. A SYAM SUNDAR REDDY Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. GP FOR REVENUE 2 The Court made the following: ORAL ORDER: Heard Sri M. Chiranjeevi, learned Counsel for the Writ Petitioner and Sri K. Arjun Chowdhary, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue appearing for the Respondent Nos.1 to 4. 2. Sri K. Arjun Chowdhary, Learned Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue has submitted the Written Instruction furnished by the Tahsildar of Putlur Mandal dated 14.01.2025 along with the Endorsement dated 08.01.2025. Copies of it are supplied to the Counsel for the Writ Petitioner as well and the same are taken on record. The relevant portion of the said Written Instruction is usefully extracted hereunder: “In view of the above as seen from the report submitted by the Village Surveyor of Sanagalaguduru village, on representation given by Ambati Bhupal Reddy the notices have given for survey to provide rastha from Naragondla Venugopal field to Ambati Bupal Reddy field. But the rastha has not marked in the village map. Naragondla Venugopal has raised the orange plants ans fenced to his field. Further it is submitted that we have given notice to Naragondla Venugopal to attend to field survey. But he is residing in Tadipatri town and informed to his brother to attend for survey. Further Naragondla Venugopal has attended to survey on 04.01.2025. Further it is noticed that the rastha asked by Ambati Bhupal Reddy is not marked in the Village map of Sanagalaguduru village of Putlur Mandal. We have not provided rastha in the field of Naragondla Venugopal and we proceeded due process of law as per Survey and Boundary Act. We have also issued endorsement to Ambati Bhupal Reddy that we are not able to show rastha to his field as there is no plan marked rastha on the field of Naragondla Venugopal.” 3. The Written Instructions would indicate that after verification of the Revenue Record, it is found that no rasta is indicated in the land belonging to the Writ Petitioner. It is also stated in the Written Instructions that the Applicant who is seeking creation of rasta through the Petitioner’s land (the 3 Unofficial Respondent No.5 herein) has been informed by the Revenue Officials through the Endorsement dated 08.01.2025 that the rasta, as requested by the Unofficial Respondent No.5 herein, is not marked in the village map of Sanagalaguduru Village, Putlur Mandal and therefore, rasta cannot be provided in the field belonging to the Writ Petitioner herein. 4. Having regard to the above extract, this Court deems it appropriate to dispose of this Writ Petition, at the admission stage, without going into the merit, directing the Official Respondents to follow the due process of law in the event that any further action is sought to be taken up in the future. 5. With these observations and directions, this Writ Petition stands disposed of. No order as to costs. 6. Interlocutory Applications, if any, stand closed in terms of this order. ______________________________________ GANNAMANENI RAMAKRISHNA PRASAD, J Dt: 21.01.2025 Vns