Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Andhra Pradesh · body

2025 DAILYLAW 41342 (AP)

MEKA PARVATHI v. THE STATE OF AP

WP/27877/2025 · 2025-10-28

Ravi Cheemalapati

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

APHC010535292025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3332] WEDNESDAY,THE TWENTY NINETH DAY OF OCTOBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE RAVI CHEEMALAPATI WRIT PETITION NO: 27877/2025 Between: 1. MEKA PARVATHI, W/O. MEKA NAGA VENKATA RAMA KRISHNA, AGED 53 YEARS, OCC HOUSEHOLD, R/O. DUMPAGADAPA VILLAGE, AKIVEEDU MANDAL, WEST GODAVARI DISTRICT. ...PETITIONER AND 1. THE STATE OF AP, REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, PANCHAYAT RAJ AND RURAL DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT, VELAGAPUDI, AMARAVATI, GUNTUR DISTRICT. 2. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR PANCHAYATI WING, WEST GODAVARI DISTRICT AT BHIMAVARAM. 3. THE DISTRICT PANCHAYAT OFFICER, WEST GODAVARI DISTRICT, COLLECTORATE COMPOUND BHIMAVARAM. 4. THE DEPUTY MANDAL PARISHAD DEVELOPMENT OFFICER, MANDALA PRAJA PARISHAD, AKIVEEDU MANDAL, WEST GODAVARI DISTRICT. 5. DUMPAGADAPA GRAM PANCHAYAT, REPRESENTED BY ITS EXECUTIVE AUTHORITY- CUM-PANCHAYAT SECRETARY AKIVEEDU MANDAL, WEST GODAVARI DISTRICT. 6. CHILLIMUNTHALA SUBRAHMANYAM, , S/O. LATE MALLIKHARJUNA RAO AGED 41 YEARS. BUSINESS, R/O. DUMPAGADAPA VILLAGE, AKIVIDU MANDAL, WEST GODAVARI 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 a writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of WRIT OF MANDAMUS or any other appropriate writ, declaring the action of the respondents in seeking to conduct survey operations for granting title deed to respondents 6 and 7 under the Svamitva Survey Programme in respect of petitioners ancestral house site property admeasuring Ac. 0.1596 cents/768 sq.yards in Survey No. 85, Gramakantham, Dumpagadapa Village, Akiveedu Mandal, West Godavari District, during pendency of Second Appeal (SA No. 640/2025) as illegal, arbitrary, violative of Articles 14, 21, 300-A of Constitution of India and the doctrine of lis pendens under Section 52 of the Transfer of Property Act, 1882, and consequently direct the concerned respondents not to proceed with any survey operations in respect of the said property not grant title deed to respondents 6 and 7 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 respondents not to conduct survey nor grant title deed to respondent 6 and 7 under Svamitva Survey Programme in petitioner’s ancestral house site property admeasuring Ac. 0.1596 cents/768 sq. 0.1596 cents/768 sq. yards in Survey No. 85, Gramakantham, Dumpagadapa Village, Akiveedu Mandal, West Godavari District, pending disposal of the main Writ Petition and pass Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. PALA KARTHI KIRAN Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. GP FOR PANCHAYAT RAJ RURAL DEV The Court made the following: ORDER: Aggrieved by the action of respondents in seeking to conduct survey operations for granting title deed to respondent Nos.6 & 7 under the Svamitva Survey Programme in respect of petitioner’s ancestral house site property admeasuring Ac.0.1596 cents/768 Sq.yards in Sy.No.85, Gramakantham Dumpagadapa Village, Akiveedu Mandal, West Godavari District, the present writ petition is filed. 2. Heard Sri Pala Kranthi Kiran, learned counsel for the petitioner, Sri Y.Koteswara Rao, learned Standing Counsel for Gram Panchayat and Ms.Naga Chandrika, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Panchayat Raj for the respondents. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner while reiterating the contents of the affidavit contended that the petitioner filed a suit in O.S.No.408 of 2010 for partition of the subject property and the said suit was dismissed by judgement and decree dated 20.08.2019 against the same, A.S.No.62 of 2019 was preferred. The same was also dismissed by order dated 24.02.2025. Thereafter, preferred Second Appeal vide S.A.No.640 of 2025 and the same is pending adjudication before this Court. While so, respondent Nos.6 & 7 are attempting to conduct survey of the subject property for the purpose of granting title deed under the Svamitva Survey Programme and if the same is allowed to continue, it not only affects the rights of the petitioner but it may also adversely affect the second appeal which is pending before this Court, as such, prayed to pass appropriate orders protecting the interest of the petitioner. 4. On the other hand, learned Assistant Government Pleader and the learned Standing Counsel collectively contended that until the second appeal is decided, the petitioner cannot have any right over the subject property. Even otherwise, the petitioner instead of moving an application in the second appeal filed the present writ petition and this Court cannot adjudicate the same under Article 226 of Constitution of India. The writ petition is devoid of merits and liable to be dismissed, accordingly, prayed to dismiss the writ petition . 5. Perused the record and considered the submissions made by both the learned counsel. 6. The suit filed by the petitioner for partition of the subject propertywas dismissed and first appeal preferred against the same was also dismissed. Aggrieved by the same, second appeal vide S.A.No.640 of 2025 has been preferred and the same is pending consideration before this Court. Pending second appeal, when respondentstried to conduct the survey of the subject property, filed the present writ petition. As rightly contended by the learned counsel for the respondents when second appeal is pending before this Court, instead of moving an application in the said appeal, filing an independent writ petition is unsustainable and this Court cannot entertain the same under 226 jurisdiction, as such, without going into the merits and demerits of the matter, this Court is inclined to dismiss the writ petition. 7. Accordingly, the Writ Petition is dismissed. There shall be no order as to costs. As a sequel, miscellaneous applications, pending if any, shall stand closed. _____________________________ JUSTICE RAVI CHEEMALAPATI Date: 29th October, 2025 RKS