1 APHC010673562025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3208] MONDAY,THE TWENTY NINETH DAY OF DECEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE D RAMESH WRIT PETITION NO: 34781/2025 Between: 1. ABBIREDDY BHAVANNARAYANA REDDY, S/O. A. RAMA CHANDRA REDDY, AGED ABOUT 60 YEARS, OCC- MANAGING PARTNER, SAUGANDHI SIVA RAMA HATCHERIES, BEACH ROAD, KOTHA PERUMALLAPURAM, TONDAGNI MANDAL, KAKINADA DISTRICT. ...PETITIONER AND 1. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, REVENUE DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT, VELAGAPUDI, AMARAVATHI, GUNTUR DISTRICT. 2. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, HOME DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT, VELAGAPUDI, AMARAVATHI, GUNTUR DISTRICT. 3. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, KAKINADA, KAKINADA DISTRICT. 4. THE SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, KAKINADA, KAKINADA DISTRICT. 5. THE SPECIAL DEPUTY COLLECTOR, K.S.E.Z, KAKINADA, KAKINADA DISTRICT. 6. THE DISTRICT REGISTRAR, KAKINADA, KAKINADA DISTRICT. 7. THE SUBREGISTRAR, PITHAPURAM MANDAL, KAKINADA DISTRICT. 8. THE TAHSILDAR, TODANGI MANDAL, KAKINADA DISTRICT. 9. ABBIREDDY APPARA RAO, S/O. A. RAMA CHANDRA REDDY, AGED ABOUT 64 YEARS R/O. NAGULAPALLI, V. KOTHAPALLI MANDAL 2 KAKINADA DISTRICT. ...RESPONDENT(S): 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 Writ of Mandamus declaring the inaction of the respondent no. 3 and 4 on the representations made by the petitioner dated 01.09.2025, having received the said representations dated 03.09.2025 as illegal, arbitrary and violation of the legal duty caste on them being an executive magistrate as well as superior officer of the police department not initiating the action as per the criminal law and violation of the article 14,16 19(g), 21 and 300(A) of constitution of India and consequentially direct the official respondents to take action on representations dated 01.09.2025 by enquiry into the matter of fraudulent transaction of execution of registered sale agreement cum general power of attorney dated 25.09.2023 in the presence of the petitioner and do justice to the petitioner and pass IA NO: 1 OF 2025 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 official respondents to take action on representations dated 01.09.2025 by inquiry into the matter of fraudulent transaction of execution of registered sale agreement cum general power of attorney dated 25.09.2023 in the presence of the petitioner and do justice to the petitioner, pending disposal of the writ Petition and pass Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. T N M RANGA RAO Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. GP FOR HOME 2. GP FOR REVENUE 3. GP FOR REGISTRATION AND STAMPS The Court made the following: 3 ORDER: The present Writ Petition is filed, under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, seeking the following relief: “….to issue Writ of Mandamus declaring the inaction of the respondent nos.3 and 4 on the representations made by the petitioner dated 01.09.2025, having received the said representations dated 03.09.2025 as illegal, arbitrary and violation of the legal duty caste on them being an executive magistrate as well as superior officer of the police department not initiating the action as per the criminal law and violation of the article 14,16, 19(g), 21 and 300(A) of constitution of India and consequentially direct the official respondents to take action on representations dated 01.09.2025 by enquiry into the matter of fraudulent transaction of execution of registered sale agreement cum general power of attorney dated 25.09.2023 in the presence of the petitioner and do justice to the petitioner and pass….” 2. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Government Pleader appearing for the respondents. 3. The present writ petition is filed declaring the action of respondent Nos.3 & 4 in not considering the representation of the petitioner dated 01.09.2025, though being an executive magistrate as well as superior officer of the Police Department, and in not initiating the action as per the criminal law, as illegal, arbitrary and violation of articles 14, 16, 19(g), 21 and 300 (A) of Constitution of India, and as a violation of the legal duty caste upon said respondents. 4. On perusal of the representation dated 01.09.2025 filed along with the writ petition, it appears that the said representation is made to the Superintendent of Police, Kakinada with regard to the registration done by the 4 respondent No.7 on various dates, and a copy of the same is marked to several authorities. 5. Hence, the contention of the petitioner is that, being the head of the District, the District Collector has a bounded duty to look into the complaints made by the petitioner and to get the same enquired through the Superintendent of Police. 6. This Court finds that the Registration Act, 1908 contains specific provisions whereby, if any registrations are done fraudulently, the only remedy is initiation of action under Section 82 and prosecution under Section 83 of the said Act. However, in the instant case, the petitioner has not been able to place on any record relating to the complaint made under these sections. 7. Considering the same, this Court is not inclined to entertain this writ petition, as being devoid of any merit. Accordingly, this Writ Petition is dismissed. 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. ___________________ JUSTICE D.RAMESH 29.12.2025 Vns