I. [3505 ] IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) TUESDAY ,THE EIGHTH DAY OF APRIL TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE T.C.D.SEKHAR WRIT PETITION NO: 30160 OF 2021 Between: Savvana Kalavathi, W/o Narayana Rao, Aged bout 71 years, Resident of House No. 1/143/13, Railway Loco Colony, Tatanagar ThanaParsudih, NearSai Mandir, Jamshedpur, Purbi, Singbhum, Jharkhand- 831002. ...Petitioner AND 1. State of Andhra Pradesh, Represented by its Principal Secretary, Revenue Department, Secretariat Building, Velagapudi, Amaravati, Andhra Pradesh. 2. District Collector, Srikakulam District. 3. Revenue Divisional Officer, Palakonda,.Srikakulam District. 4. Tahsildar, Hira Mandalam, Srikakulam District. 5. Sunkara Mohan Rao, S/o Sunkara Narasimha Rao, Aged about 65 years, Korada Village, Subhalai Colony, NearShivalayam, Hira Mandalam, Srikakulam District. 532459. ...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 appropriate Writ, Order Writ in the nature of Mandamus declaring the action of the 4‘^ deleting the name of the petitioner and mutating the respondent in the Revenue Revenue Records for the lands of 0.21 cents in Survey No. 87-1 and Ac. 1-05 cents in Survey No. 94-3 of or Direction preferably a respondent in name of the 5^^^ an extent of Korada Village, Hira Mandalam, Srikakulam District violative of principles of natural justice apart from violative of Article 14 and 300 A of the Constitution of India and set aside the consequently direct the respondents 2 to 4 to mutate the name of the petitioner in online revenue record for the subject land by deleting the of the respondent. lA NO: 1 OF 2021 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 2 to 4 not to issue Pattadar Passbook and Title deeds in favour of the 5*^ respondent for the land of an extent of 0.21 cents in Survey No. 87-1 and Ac. 1-05 cents in Survey No. 94-3 of Korada Village, Hira Mandalam, Srikakulam District; Counsel for the PetItioneriSRI. Y SUDHAKAR Counsel for the Respondents: GP FOR REVENUE The Court made the following: as illegal, arbitrary, and 21 same and name / i 1 APHC010502652021 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3505] TUESDAY, THE EIGHTH DAY OF APRIL TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE T.C.D.SEKHAR WRIT PETITION NO: 30160/2021 Between: Savvana Kalavathi ...PETITIONER AND State Of Andhra Pradesh and Others ...RESPONDENT{S) Counsel for the Petitioner: 1.Y SUDHAKAR Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1.ARAVALA RAMA RAO 2.GP FOR REVENUE 2 The Court made the following order: The petitioner claims that she is the absolute owner and possessor of land admeasuring an extent of Ac.0.21 cents in Sy.No.87-1 and an extent of Ac.1.41 cents in Sy.No.94-3 of Korada Village, Hira Mandal, Srikakulam District, it is further case of the petitioner that her husband, Sri Narayana Rao, purchased the subject lands from the father of the 5*^ respondent way back in the year 1971. After the demise of the husband of the petitioner, she came into possession of the property in dispute. Thereafter, she approached the 4^^^ respondent requesting to mutate her name in the revenue records and to issue pattadar passbooks and title deeds in her favour. Accordingly, after the enquiry, the 4**^ respondent mutated her name in revenue records and issued pattadar passbooks and title deeds in her favour over the subject lands. It is stated that the pattdar passbooks issued in her favour were deposited in Andhra Pradesh Grammena Vikas Bank, Korada, for obtaining financial assistance for doing agricultural activities over the lands in dispute. It is further contended that, in view of the natural calamity, all the houses in her village were submerged including her house and lost sale deed pertaining to the subject lands during the year 1980. It is 3 further case of the petitioner that, as she became old, she is staying with her son in Jharkhand. Taking advantage of the same, the 5*^ respondent influenced the 4*^ respondent and got mutated his name in the revenue records over the lands in dispute without issuing any notice. The said action of the 4^'' respondent is being assailed in the present writ petition. On the other hand, the 4‘^ respondent filed counter affidavit inter alia contending that the 5'^ respondent is the actual owner and possessor of the property in dispute, and on coming to know that the petitioner’s name is mutated in the revenue records, he made a representation to the 4*'' respondent seeking to mutate his name in the revenue records over the lands in dispute. It is further averred in the counter affidavit that having verified the documents submitted by the 5‘^ respondent, the 4*^ respondent mutated his name in the revenue records. It is pertinent to mention that the 4'^ respondent categorically admitted in the counter affidavit that while mutating the name of the 5*^ respondent no notice was issued to the petitioner. 2. Though no counter is filed by the 5*^ respondent, he would submit that the petitioner claims that her husband purchased the 3. r- % 4 subject lands through unregistered sale deed from his father, and copy of the sale deed also not filed along with the writ petition, in support of her claim. He would further submit that, his father never alienated the subject lands in favour of the husband of the petitioner. The respondent after conducting enquiry rightly mutated his name in the revenue records, in respect of subject land. 4. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned counsel for the 5'^ respondent and learned Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue. 5. Perused the material available on record. It is not in dispute that the name of the petitioner was in existence in revenue records over the subject lands prior to the mutation of the name of the 5*'^ respondent. Further, on perusal of the counter affidavit filed by the 4*'^ respondent, it is clear that the 4*^ respondent did not issue any notice to the petitioner before mutating the name of the respondent in the revenue records. Thereby, the action of the 4‘^ respondent, in mutating name of the respondent, is vitiated by law. Further, whenever the entries in 6. 5 revenue records are to be changed, the same has to be done after following the procedure contemplated under Act 26 of 1971. In the case on hand, admittedly, the respondent did not adhere to the said procedure. Apart from the same, this Court in Chinnam Pandurangam S/0. Late Maniah v. The Mandal held that whenever the entries are to be 7. 1 Revenue Officer changed, it is incumbent on the part of the concerned authority to issue notice to the person whose name is in existence in the revenue records. Admittedly, no notice is given to the petitioner, thereby the 4'^ respondent violated the principles of natural justice. In view of the same, the action of the 4^^ respondent, in mutating name of the respondent in revenue records over the subject land is sustainable and accordingly, the same is set aside. Further, the 4‘^ respondent is directed to issue notice to the petitioner as well as to the 5'^ respondent calling for objections with regard to their claim over the lands and thereafter pass appropriate orders in the matter, after affording an opportunity of being heard. 8. 2007 (0) ALT 134 6 9. With the above direction, the Writ Petition is allowed. There shall be no order as to costs. Sd/- M. SRINIVAS ASSISTANT, REGISTRAR ^ICER //TRUE COPY// S To, 1) The Principal Secretary, State of Andhra Pradesh, Revenue Department, Secretariat Building, Velagapudi, Amaravati, Andhra Pradesh. (BY SPECIAL MESSENGER) 2) District Collector, Srikakulam District. 3) Revenue Divisional Officer, Palakonda, Srikakulam District. 4) Tahsildar, Hira Mandalam, Srikakulam District. 5) Sunkara Mohan Rao, S/o Sunkara Narasimha Rao, Aged about 65 years, Korada Village, Subhalai Colony, NearShivalayam, Hira Mandalam, Srikakulam District. 532459. (Addresses Nos.2 to 5 BY RAPD) 6) OneCCto SRI. Y SUDHAKAR Advocate [OPUC] 7) Two CCs to GP FOR REVENUE ,High Court Of Andhra Pradesh. [OUT] 8) Three CD Copies HIGH COURT DATED:08/04/2025 ORDER Kf AN07S ^ 2 5JUL 2025 WP.No.30160 of 2021 Co O Ssijurrent Sectiopx''^^ ALLOWING THE WRIT PETITION WITHOUT COSTS