IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH :: AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) FRIDAY, THE TWENTY EIGHTH DAY OF MARCH TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE T.C.D.SEKHAR WRIT PETITION NO: 15417 OF 2020 Between: 1. Sri Shaik Khader Basha, S/o. Late Mohd. Ghouse, Aged 75 years, occ. Cultivation, Chittecherla village, Chinnagottigallu Mandal, Chittoor District. 2. Sri Shaik Basha Mohiddin, S/o. Mohd. Ghouse, Aged 70 years, Occ. Cultivation, Chittecherla village, Chinnagottigallu Mandal, Chittoor District. ...PETITIONERS AND 1. The State of Andhra Pradesh, Represented by the Principal Secretary Government of Andhra Pradesh, Revenue Department, Velagapudi Amaravathi. 2. The District Collector, Chittoor. 3. The Sub Collector, Madanapalle, Chittoor District. 4. The Tahsildar, Chinnagottigallu, Chittoor District ...RESPONDENTS Pstition undsr ArticI© 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 pass appropriate order or orders more one in the nature of a writ of mandamus declaring the action of the respondents in threatening to dispossess the petitioners from their peaceful possession and enjoyment of the land to an extent of Ac.4.50 cents in S.No.2675/1 and extent of Ac. 3.50 cents an in S.No.2675/2 of Chittecherla village, Chinnagottigallu Mandal, Chittoor District without there being any notice or order as illegal, arbitrary, biased, unconstitutional and ultravires and consequently direct the respondents not to dispossess the petitioners from their peaceful possession and enjoyment of the land to an extent of Ac.4.50 cents in S.No.2675/1 and an extent of Ac. 3.50 cents in S.No.2675/2 of Chittecherla village, Chinnagottigallu Mandal, Chittoor District. lA NO: 1 OF 2020 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 not to dispossess the petitioners from their peaceful possession and enjoyment of the land to extent of Ac.4.50 cents in S.No.2675/1 and an extent of Ac. 3.50 cents in S.No.2675/2 of Chittecherla village, Chinnagottigallu Mandal, Chittoor District. an Counsel for the Petitioners : SRI SURESH KUMAR REDDY KALAVA Counsel for the Respondents: GP FOR REVENUE The Court made the following: 7 ./ t APHC010233842020 / IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) •I [3505] FRIDAY. THE TWENTY EIGHTH DAY OF MARCH TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE T.C.D.SEKHAR WRIT PETITION NO: 15417/2020 Between: ...PETITIONER(S) Sri Shaik Khader Basha and Others AND ...RESPONDENT(S) The State Of Andhra Pradesh and Others Counsel for the Petitioner(S): 1.SURESH KUMAR REDDY KALAVA Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1.GP FOR REVENUE 2 The Court made the following order: The petitioners claim that the 4*^ respondent granted DKT DKT.No.AMNo.73/1400 and proceedings vide patta AMNo.72/4/1400, dated 30.10.1990, for an extent of 4.50 cents in Sy.No.2675/1 and an extent of 3.50 cents in Sy.No.2675/2 respectively at Chittecherla Village, Chinnagottigallu Mandal, Chittoor District. It is further case of the petitioners that from the date of assignment, they have been in peaceful possession and enjoyment of the subject land without any interruption from anybody, and they have also obtained electricity connection for conducting agricultural operations. As on the date of filing of the writ petition, there was standing paddy crop in the subject lands. It is their further case that the ancestors of the petitioners were in possession of the subject lands for the past seven decades, and in view of the same, the father of the petitioners made an application for grant of assignment during the year 1967. In pursuance there to, the 2 nd the instructions to issued respondent 4*^ respondent on 22.01.1967, to consider the application filed by the father of the petitioners and take necessary actions in the matter. Thereafter, the 4”^ respondent inspected the subject lands on 29.12.1967, and reported that though the land classified as ‘Gunta Poramboke’, the same is fit for cultivation and found No Objection Transfer of the subject lands into Assessed Waste Dry (AWD) and 3 accordingly, recommended for change of classification, by proceedings dated 03.10.1971, forwarded the recommendation to the 3'^ respondent. Pursuant there to, the 3^'^ respondent sent proposal dated 26.10.1971 to the 2'^'" respondent. Thereafter, the 2^'" respondent after enquiry changed the classification of the subject lands by proceedings dated 11.11.1971. It is the case of the petitioners that, after the demise of their father, the petitioners granted DKT patta over the subject lands on 30.10.1990. While things stood thus, the 4*^ respondent, along with his staff, inspected the lands in dispute and directed the petitioners not to enter into the same, as the lands are classified as ‘Gunta Poramboke’ in revenue records. In turn, the petitioners informed the 4*^ respondent that the classification of the subject lands were changed long ago and DKT patta was issued to them. Despite the same, the 4*^ respondent continued to interfere with the possession of the petitioners. Questioning the said action of the respondents, the petitioners approached this Court by filing the present Writ Petition. were 2. On the other hand, the 4*^ respondent-Tahsildar filed counter affidavit stating that total extents of Sy.No.2675 is Ac. 12.02 cents and the same is classified as ‘Gunta Poramboke’ in the revenue records. It is further averred in the counter affidavit that the petitioners were never granted assignment over the lands in dispute 4 and the alleged pattas filed by the petitioners along with the writ petition are forged and bogus. Though the petitioners are in possession of the lands in dispute, the same will not confer any right to the petitioners, inasmuch they are in illegal occupation. Moreover, it is contended that, the petitioners did not place any order passed by the competent authority changing the classification of the lands, and in the absence of the same, the contention of the petitioners is liable to be rejected. It is further stated that, the petitioners tried to encroach upon the subject lands and the same was prevented by the revenue authorities. It is further averred in the counter affidavit that the subject lands are continuously showing as ‘Gunta th Poramboke’ in revenue records and at that juncture, the 4 respondent issued notice on 04.09.2020, calling upon the petitioners to attend enquiry on 11.09.2020, and to produce available documentary evidence in respect of their claim. Accordingly, the petitioners attended for enquiry and submitted DKT patta, alleged to have been issued in their favour along with other documents. On a further perusal of the counter affidavit, the 4‘^ respondent has stated that the petitioners did not produce any documentary evidence and failed to place the alleged copy of the order changing the classification of the land in dispute. It shows that, the 4“^ respondent made contradictory statements in the counter affidavit. 5 3. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue. 4. Perused the material available on record. It is the case of the petitioners that they were granted DKT patta during the year 1990, and they have been in continuous and uninterrupted possession of the subject lands. On the other hand, respondent subject lands are classified as ‘Gunta Poramboke’ in the records, therefore, the question of issuance of DKT patta to the petitioners does riot arise and the alleged DKT patta filed by the petitioners are nothing but forged and bogus. The petitioners have filed documents with regard to change of classification of lands from Gunta Poramboke to AWD. However, the same was denied the 4*^ respondent. A notice dated 04.09.2020 was issued to the petitioners asking them to attend for an enquiry, which is to be conducted 11.09.2020. Upon which, the petitioners subjected themselves before the enquiry by producing the relevant documents along with DKT pattas. Thereafter, the 4‘^ respondent did not take any action in the matter nor passed any orders. The petitioners have filed copies of D-Form pattas issued in their favour along with the writ petition, apart from other inter se proceedings between the respondents in respect of the subject land. This court by order dated 01.09.2020, 5. 4th the contended that the revenue on 6 granted interim order of Status-Quo, and the same is subsisting till today. In view of the above, this Court does not go into the merits of the matter in deciding the correctness or otherwise of the issuance of D-Form pattas in favour of the petitioners. 6. In the light of the above facts and circumstances, instead of going into the merits of the matter, this court feels that it is appropriate to dispose of the writ petition, directing the 4 respondent to issue a fresh notice to the petitioners calling for objections. Upon which, the petitioners are directed to submit their objections and thereafter, the 4*^ respondent shall pass appropriate orders in the matter after affording an opportunity of being heard to the petitioners. th 7. With the above direction, the Writ Petition is disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs. As a sequel, miscellaneous applications pending, if any shall stand closed. Sd/- G. HELA NAIDU ASSISTANT REGISTRAR p- ^ //TRUE COPY// SECTION OFFICER To, 1. The Principal Secretary, Revenue Department, State of Andhra Pradesh, Government of Andhra Pradesh, Velagapudi, Amaravathi 1 2. The District Collector, Chittoor. 3. The Sub Collector, Madanapalle. Chittoor District. The Tahsildar, Chinnagottigallu, Chittoor District. One CC to Sri Suresh Kumar Reddy Kalava, Advocate [OPUC] Two CCs to GP for Revenue, High Court of Andhra Pradesh. [OUT] Three CD Copies 4. 5. 6. 7. HIGH COURT DATED;28/03/2025 ORDER fS KNDiiS M 15 JUL 2025 Co o SsDimnt 3= WP.No.15417of2020 THE WRIT PETITION IS DISPOSED OF WITHOUT COSTS