KAKANUR BALA GANGADHARA REDDY v. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH
WP/11097/2025 · 2025-04-29
Venkateswarlu Nimmagadda
body2025
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 44740 (AP) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 44740 (AP) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
APHC010207822025
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3329] WEDNESDAY ,THE THIRTIETH DAY OF APRIL TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE VENKATESWARLU NIMMAGADDA WRIT PETITION NO: 11097/2025 Between: Kakanur Bala Gangadhara Reddy ...PETITIONER AND The State Of Andhra Pradesh ...RESPONDENT Counsel for the Petitioner:
1. BUGULU SREETEJA Counsel for the Respondent:
1. GP FOR ASSIGNMENT ORDER:
This Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking the following relief:
“ to issue writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of writ of mandamus under article 226 of the constitution of India by declaring the action of the respondents particularly respondent Nos.2 continuing to include the petitioners property i.e. Ac.1.60 Maseedupruam village of Mahanandi Mandal, Nandyal district in the list of Prohibitory properties maintained under section 22 A (1) (b) of the registration act, 1908 thereby resulting in non-registration of documents in relation thereto, as illegal, arbitrary, without
jurisdiction violative of articles 14, 21 and 300-A of the constitution of India and consequently direct the respondent No.2 to delete the above mentioned property from the said prohibition list and to pass such other order or orders...”
2. The case of the petitioner is that the petitioner is the absolute owner and possessor of the subject property, admeasuring to an extent of Ac. 1.60 cents in Sy. No. 354/1, situated at Maseedupuram Village of Mahanandi Mandal, Nandyal District and having acquired the said property by way of succession from his ancestors and since then the petitioner has been in possession and enjoyment of the subject property. However, the subject land was inadvertently enlisted in the Prohibitory List under Section 22-A(1)(b) of the Registration Act, 1908. For which, the petitioner submitted a representation to the respondents ‘authorities (Respondents 2 to 4). Pursuant to the representation submitted by the petitioner, the 3rd and 4th respondents conducted a detailed enquiry. Based on this enquiry, the 3rd respondent submitted a detailed enquiry report dated 06.01.2024, addressed to the 2nd respondent, who is the competent authority for the deletion of the property from the Prohibitory List. The report concluded that the subject land was neither acquired nor proposed to be acquired by the government for any purpose, and thus, recommended that the property be delisted from the Prohibitory List.
Despite this recommendation, no action has been taken by the respondents to adhere to the report and
delete the subject property from the prohibitory list. Hence, the present writ petition. 3. On the other hand, the learned Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue, appearing for the respondents, submits that since the 3rd and 4th respondents submitted a detailed enquiry report to the 2nd respondent, who is the competent authority to redress the grievance of the petitioner, the 2nd respondent will consider the said report and pass appropriate orders in accordance with law. 4. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Government Pleader for the respondents. 5. Having regard to the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue appearing for the respondents, and upon perusal of the material available on record, this Court is of the considered view that the present writ petition can be disposed of by directing the 2nd respondent to consider the enquiry report submitted by the 3rd and 4th respondents and pass appropriate orders in accordance with law, after providing an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner and any other stakeholders, if any, within a period of three (03) months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. 6. With the above direction, the writ petition is disposed of. No costs. Consequently, Miscellaneous Petitions, if any, pending in the writ petition shall stand closed. ______________________________________ VENKATESWARLU NIMMAGADDA, J 30.04.2025 kkllkk
248 HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE VENKATESWARLU NIMMAGADDA
WRIT PETITION No.11097 of 2025
30.04.2025 kkllkk