IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH :: AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) FRIDAY, THE TWENTY FIRST DAY OF MARCH TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE T.C.D.SEKHAR WRIT PETITION NO: 42610 OF 2022 Between: Shaik Subhani, S/o Bude Saheb, Aged 60 years, Occ: Agriculturist, R/o Machavaram Town, Motharu Bazar, Machavaram Mandal, Palnadu District, ...PETITIONER AND 1. The State of AP, represented by its Principal Secretary, Revenue Department, Secretariat Buildings, Velagapudi, Guntur District. 2. The District Collector, Narsaraopet, Palnadu District, Andhra Pradesh. 3. The Tahsildar, Machavaram, Machavaram Mandal, Palnadu District. 4. Smt Valisala Venkata Lakshmamma, W/o Valisala. Lakshmi Kotaiah, Age, Major, Occ; House Wife, Machavaram Village, Machavaram Mandal, Palnadu 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 in the nature of Mandamus, declaring the action of the respondents to demarcate and to fix the boundaries and mutation my name in revenue records for the land to an extent of Ac 0.50 cents of Akurajupalli village, Machavaram Mandal, Palnadu District, even after lapse of almost more than 110 days from the date of order in WP No 28765/2022, the 3rd respondent issued Endorsement to me Vide Rc No 161/2022 dated on 29-10-2022 verified revenue records has reported the 4th respondent Name is recorded as pattadar for the said land, as being illegal, arbitrary and violation Article 14, 21 and 300-A of Constitution of India, and consequently direct the respondents to survey and demarcate the petitioner land and delate illegal entries of 4th respondent forthwith in terms of the request made by the petitioner. lA NO: 1 OF 2022 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 to delate illegal entrie of 4th respondent on revenue records, in survey No 8/81A of the petitioner land admeasuring Ac 0.50 cents of Akurajupalli village, Machavaram Mandai, Palnadu District, pending disposal of the above writ petition. Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI VUYYURU LAKSHMANA RAO Counsel for the Respondent Nos. 1 to 3: GP FOR REVENUE Counsel for the Respondent No.4: — The Court made the following: ORDER APHC010722342022 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3505] wm FRIDAY, THE TWENTY FIRST DAY OF MARCH TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE T.C.D.SEKHAR WRIT PETITION NO: 42610/2022 Between: ...PETITIONER Shaik Subhani AND The State Of Ap and Others ...RESPONDENT(S) Counsel for the Petitioner: 1.VUYYURU LAKSHMANA RAO Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1.GP FOR REVENUE 2 IV' The Court made the following order: The petitioner claims that he is the absolute owner and possessor of the land admeasuring an extent of Ac.0.50 cents in Sy.No.8/8-1A of Akirajupalli Village, Machavaram Mandal, Palnadu District, by virtue of a settlement deed dated 23.10.2020, executed by his father. Since the date of the gift deed, he is in possession and enjoyment of the subject land as absolute owner. It is further case of the petitioner that, prior to the execution of gift deed, the said property was standing in the name of his father in the revenue records, and in fact, the respondent also issued pattadar passbooks in his favour of his father. After execution of the settlement deed, the petitioner filed an application dated 10.06.2022, through mee-seva in Form-6 of ROR Act, requesting the 3 respondent to mutate his name in revenue records over an extent of 0.50 cents situated in Sy.No.8/8-1A. When there was no response from the 3'^'^ respondent, the petitioner filed a writ petition vide W.P.No.28765 of 2022 before this Court, and the same was disposed of by order dated 08.09.2022, directing the 3'^^ respondent to dispose of the application of the petitioner dated 10.06.2022, within a period of four weeks. The petitioner contended that, pursuant to the order passed by this Court in the said writ petition, the 3'"'^ respondent issued notice to the 4^'^ respondent asking her to f rd 3 appear on 21.10.2022, so as to conduct survey. Despite receiving notice, the respondent was not present on the said date, and therefore, the 3'"^ respondent could not undertake survey and issued endorsement dated 29.10.2022, stating that the order dated 08.09.2022 made in W.P.No.28765 of 2022, could not be implemented, as the 4*^ respondent was not present in spite of issuance of notice. Impugning the said endorsement, the present writ petition is filed. On the other hand, the 3'*^ respondent filed counter affidavit stating that the 4'^ respondent approached him seeking to mutate her name over the subject land based on the unregistered agreement dated 12.09.2020, which is said to have been executed by the petitioner. It is further stated that, after conducting an enquiry, the name of the 4‘^ respondent is mutated in the revenue records. 2. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue. 3. 4. This Court directed the counsel for the petitioner to take out personal notice on the 4“" respondent and in pursuance of the same, notice was sent to the 4*^ respondent and same was returned unserved with an endorsement that “the 4*" respondent is 4 r continuously absent”. The petitioner filed memo dated 21.02.2024 0 showing the same On perusal of the counter affidavit, it is clear that, no notice issued to the petitioner before mutating the name of the respondent in the revenue records over the subject lands. As per the averments made in support of writ petition, it is case of the petitioner that he has claimed title over the subject lands by virtue of a settlement deed dated 23.10.2020, executed by his father. It is not known as to how the respondent mutated the name of the 4 respondent in revenue records basing on the unregistered agreement dated 12.09.2016, which is said have been executed by the petitioner. By which date, the petitioner was not the owner of the said property, inasmuch as he claims right over the subject property, by virtue of the gift deed dated 23.10.2020. Further, it is not in dispute that the name of the petitioner’s father was in existence in the revenue records, over the lands in dispute. Therefore, there is any amount of doubt over the title of the 4'^ respondent. Apart from the same, the 3'"^ respondent did not take any action except issuing respondent, and thereby issued impugned endorsement stating that the order of this Court in W.P.No.28567 of 5. was th th notice to the 4 ( ■% 5 2022 could not be complied with, instead of taking further steps in the matter. In view of the above, the present Writ Petition is disposed of, directing the 3'"'^ respondent to consider the representation dated 10.06.2022, submitted by the petitioner, and pass appropriate orders by affording an opportunity of being heard to the petitioner and as well as to the 4^^ respondent, within a period of eight (08) weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. 6. As a sequel, miscellaneous applications pending, if any, shall stand closed. Sd/- M SRiNlVAS //TRUE COPY// ASSISTANT REGISTRAR j i SECTION OFFICER To, 1. The Principal Secretary, Revenue Department, Secretariat Buildings, Velagapudi, Guntur District. 2. The District Collector, Narsaraopet, Palnadu District, Andhra Pradesh. 3. The Tahsildar, Machavaram, Machavaram Mandal, Palnadu District. 4. One CC to Sri Vuyyuru Lakshmana Rao Advocate [OPUC] 5. Two CCs to GP for Revenue, High Court of Andhra Pradesh. [OUT] 6. Three CD Copies TF \ -r \ HIGH COURT DATED:21/03/2025 ORDER WP.No.42610 of 2022 X 2 5 APR 2025 €0, ^ . Current Secuon DISPOSING OF THE W.P., WITHOUT COSTS