APHC010729242018 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3529] TUESDAY, THE TWENTY FIFTH DAY OF NOVEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE R RAGHUNANDAN RAO THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE T.C.D.SEKHAR WRIT APPEAL Nos.428 & 429 of 2019 WRIT APPEAL NO: 428/2019 Writ Appeal under clause 15 of the Letters Patent by the orders of the Learned Single Judge the Hon'ble Mr. Justice M. SEETHARAMA MURTI in W.P.No.29174/2014, dated.16.07.2018, Between: 1. SAVVA @ CHAVVA SARABHA REDDY,, S/O. KONDA REDDY, AGED ABOUT 43 YEARS, R/O. ABBIPURAM VILLAGE, MAHANANDI MANDAL, KURNOOL DISTRICT ...APPELLANT AND 1. SMT HAFEEZA BEE, W/O. S. BASHA, AGED ABOUT 78 YEARS, R/O. 28-1627A, NEAR E-SEVA KENDRAM, NOONEPALLY, R.S. ROAD, NANDYAL MANDAL, KURNOOL. 2. STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, REVENUE DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT BUILDINGS, VELAGAPUDI, GUNTUR DISTRICT. 3. THE JOINT COLLECTOR, KURNOOL, KURNOOL DISTRICT. 4. THE REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER, NANDYAL, KURNOOL DISTRICT. 2 RRR,J & TCDS,J W.A.Nos.428 & 429 of 2019 5. THE TAHSILDHAR, MAHANANDI MANDAL, KURNOOL DISTRICT. 6. SHAIK FATIMA BANSAR, W/O.IQBAL, AGED 39 YEARS, R/O. D.NO. 6-364, MARKAPUR, PRAKASAM DISTRICT. 7. SHAIK KHASIM PEERAN, S/O. LATE SHAIK SHANOOR BASHA, 35 YEARS, R/O. H.NO. 17-116/5, MADINA COLONY, BADLAGUDA, KESHOGIRI, HYDERABAD. 8. SHAIK MUNTAZ BEGUM, W/O. SHAIK HUSSAIN SA, 33 YEARS, R/O. D.NO. 6-364, MARKAPUR, PRAKASAM DISTRICT. RESPONDENT NO.6 TO 8 ARE BROUGHT ON RECORD AS LRS OF RESPONDENT NO.1 AS PER C.O.DT.29.07.2025 VIDE I.A.NO.2 OF 2020 IN W.A.NO.428 OF 2019. ...RESPONDENT(S): IA NO: 1 OF 2019 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 suspend the Judgment in W.P.No.29174/2014, dated 16-07-2018 pending disposal of the above writ appeal and pass IA NO: 2 OF 2019 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 IA NO: 1 OF 2020 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 Pleased to treat the additional affidavit as part and parcel of W.A.No. 428/2019 and pass IA NO: 2 OF 2020 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 Pleased topermit the petitioners herein to come on record being the legal representatives of the deceased 1st respondent in the above appeal as respondents 6 to 8 and pass 3 RRR,J & TCDS,J W.A.Nos.428 & 429 of 2019 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 Post the matter under the caption of <For Being Mentioned= and to pass necessary orders in the circumstances of the case. WRIT APPEAL NO: 429/2019 Writ Appeal under clause 15 of the Letters Patent by the orders of the Learned Single Judge the Hon'ble Mr. Justice M. SEETHARAMA MURTI in W.P.No.31251/2014, dated.16.07.2018, the appellant begs to prefer this memorandum writ appeal Between: 1. SAVVA @ CHAVVA SARABHA REDDY,, S/O. KONDA REDDY, AGED ABOUT 43 YEARS, R/O. ABBIPURAM VILLAGE, MAHANANDI MANDAL, KURNOOL DISTRICT APPELLANT/ 5TH RESPONDENT IN W.P NO. 31251/2014 ...APPELLANT AND 1. SAMPANGI PEDDA SUBBA RAYUDU, S/O. LATE CHINNA SUBBANNA, AGED ABOUT 64 YEARS, RIO. ABBIPURAM VILLAGE, MAHANANDI MANDAL, KURNOOL DISTRICT. 2. SAMPANGI CHINNA SUBBA RAYUDU, S/O. LATE CHINNA SUBBANNA, AGED ABOUT 57 YEARS, R/ O. ABBIPURAM VILLAGE, MAHANANDI MANDAL, KURNOOL DISTRICT. 3. SAMPANGI VENKATESWARLU, S/O. LATE CHINNA SUBBANNA, AGED ABOUT 53 YEARS, R/O. ABBIPURAM VILLAGE, MAHANANDI MANDAL, KURNOOL DISTRICT. 4. STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, REVENUE DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT BUILDINGS, VELAGAPUDI, GUNTUR DISTRICT. 5. THE JOINT COLLECTOR, KURNOOL, KURNOOL DISTRICT. 4 RRR,J & TCDS,J W.A.Nos.428 & 429 of 2019 6. THE REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER, NANDYAL, KURNOOL DISTRICT. 7. THE TAHSILDHAR, MAHANANDI MANDAL, KURNOOL DISTRICT. 8. SAMPANGI LAKSMAMMA, W/O. LATE SAMPANGI PEDDA SUBBA RAYUDU, AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS, R/O. ABBIPURAM VILLAGE, MAHANANDI MANDAL, KURNOOL DISTRICT. 9. SAMPANGI JAIPALU, , S/O. LATE SAMPANGI PEDDA SUBBA RAYUDU, AGED ABOUT 42 YEARS, R/O. ABBIPURAM VILLAGE, MAHANANDI MANDAL, KURNOOL DISTRICT. 10. SAMPANGI VIJAYA BHASKAR, S/O.LATE SAMPANGI PEDDA SUBBA RAYUDU, AGED ABOUT 37 YEARS, R/O. ABBIPURAM VILLAGE, MAHANANDI MANDAL, KURNOOL DISTRICT. 11. GUNDRAI LAKSMI DEVI, W/O. VENKATESWARLU, D/O. LATE SAMPANGI PEDDA SUBBA RAYUDU, AGED ABOUT 39 YEARS, R/O. KANMADAKALA VILLAGE, ORVAKAL MANDAL, KURNOOL DISTRICT. RESPONDENTS NO.8 TO 11 ,ARE BROUGHT ON RECORD AS LRS OF RESPONDENT NO.1 AS PER C.O.DT.05.08.2025,VIDE I.A.NO.1 OF 2025 IN W.A.NO.429 OF 2019. ...RESPONDENT(S): IA NO: 1 OF 2019 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 condone the delay of 415 days in representing the writ appeal S.R No. 56437/2018 IA NO: 2 OF 2019 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 suspend the Judgment in W.P.No.29174/2014, dated 16-07-2018 pending disposal of the above writ appeal IA NO: 1 OF 2020 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 5 RRR,J & TCDS,J W.A.Nos.428 & 429 of 2019 Pleased to treat the additional affidavit as part and parcel of W.A.No. 429/2019 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 may be pleased to permit the appellant bring on record 1. Sampangi Laksmamma, 2. Sampangi Jaipalu, 3.Sampangi Vijaya Bhaskar and 4.Gundrai Laksmi Devi as Legal heirs of the 1st respondent Sampangi Pedda Subba Rayudu as party respondents 8 to 11 in W.A.No. 429/2019 as well as in LA's and pass Counsel for the Appellant: 1. K RATHANGA PANI REDDY Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. V NITESH 2. M BALASUBRAHMANYAM 3. GP FOR REVENUE (AP) 6 RRR,J & TCDS,J W.A.Nos.428 & 429 of 2019 The Court made the following Common Judgment: (per Hon’ble Sri Justice R. Raghunandan Rao) The Tahsildar, Mahanandi Mandal, Kurnool District is personally present in Court. The necessary record has also been produced before this Court. The presence of the Tahsildar, Mahanandi Mandal, is dispensed with. 2. As the issues arising in both these Writ Appeals are the same and arise on contiguous parcels of land, they are being disposed of, by way of this common Judgment. 3. Heard Sri K. Rathanga Pani Reddy, learned counsel appearing for the appellant in both the Writ Appeals, Sri V. Nitesh, learned counsel appearing for the private respondents, in W.A.No.428 of 2019, Sri M. Balasubrahmanyam, learned counsel appearing for the private respondents, in W.A.No.429 of 2019 and the learned Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue appearing for the official respondents, in both the Writ Appeals. 4. The subject matter of the dispute is an extent of Ac.6.56 cents of land in Sy.No.380 of Bukkapuram Village, Mahanandi Mandal, Kurnool District. The appellant in these two (02) Writ Appeals, contends that, the said land belongs to late Sri Chavva Venkat Reddy and had devolved upon him by way of inheritance. In the year, 2010, the Revenue Divisional Officer, Nandyal, had passed certain proceedings, dated 26.06.2010, wherein the Revenue Divisional Officer, had recorded that, Sy.No.380 had been sub-divided into 7 RRR,J & TCDS,J W.A.Nos.428 & 429 of 2019 Sy.Nos.380/1A, 380/1B and 380/2, by way of the proceedings of the Tahsildar, Nandyal, dated 27.06.1969. The Revenue Divisional Officer, also recorded that, an extent of Ac.2.03 cents of land, in Sy.No.380/1A and an extent of Ac.1.96 cents of land, in Sy.No.380/1B had been assigned to the 1st respondent in Writ Appeal No.428 of 2019 and Sri S. Pedda Subbarayudu, who had subsequently alienated the said land. It was also recorded that, on the basis of the said sub-division, the lands in Sy.Nos.380/1A and 380/1B should be treated as assigned lands and the land in Sy.No.380/2 should be treated as patta land and gave a direction to the Tahsildar for incorporation of changes in the relevant mandal and village accounts. The appellant being aggrieved by this Order, had approached the Joint Collector, Kurnool, by way of a Revision. This Revision came to be disposed of, on 06.09.2014. The Joint Collector, took the view that the revenue records initially recorded that the entire land was private patta land belonging to Sri Chavva Venkat Reddy and consequently, there could not be a sub division of the said survey number with certain parts being declared as assigned lands. The Joint Collector took the view that, any change of the nature of the land from private patta land to Government land could only have been done in the four (04) circumstances set out in the Order. The Joint Collector, thereupon observed that, none of the four (04) circumstances, have been demonstrated. In that view of the matter, the Joint Collector had held that, the assignment made over the lands and the issue of pattadar passbooks and title deeds in favour of the persons claiming to be assignees have become irregular and need to be cancelled. 8 RRR,J & TCDS,J W.A.Nos.428 & 429 of 2019 5. The private respondents being aggrieved by this Order, approached this Court, by way of W.P.Nos.29174 & 31251 of 2014. The learned Single Judge, in W.P.No.29174 of 2014, took the view that the Revenue Authorities could not have cancelled the assignment pattas or changes in the revenue records, after a period of 45 years. The learned Single Judge also noted the fact that, civil litigation had already been initiated between the parties, in this Writ Petition, being O.S.No.544 of 2009, in which the private respondents had succeeded in getting an Order of permanent injunction, by way of a judgment and decree against which the appellant had filed A.S.No.49 of 2017, before the learned III Additional District Judge, Kurnool at Nandyal. 6. Similarly, the learned Single Judge, took note of the fact that, the parties in W.P.No.31251 of 2014, had also initiated civil litigation themselves, by way of O.S.Nos.307 of 2012 & 235 of 2014, before the learned Principal Senior Civil Judge, Nandyal, which had ended in favour of the appellant herein. The learned Single Judge, also noted that an Appeal filed against this judgment, by way of A.S.No.5 of 2024, was before the learned III Additional District Judge, Kurnool at Nandyal. 7. The learned Single Judge, after considering all the developments as well as the facts of the law, had held that, it would be appropriate to set aside the Order of the Joint Collector, while leaving open, all the issues involved in the dispute, to be decided, in the pending Appeal Suits with a further right being given to the parties, if they so choose, to file a comprehensive Civil Suit, 9 RRR,J & TCDS,J W.A.Nos.428 & 429 of 2019 before a Civil Court of competent jurisdiction. The learned Single Judge, disposed of the Writ Petition, making it clear that, the Court was not offering any final opinion, in the matter and any proceedings initiated, before the Competent Court or Forum should be decided uninfluenced by the observations in the Order of the learned Single Judge. 8. Aggrieved by these Orders of the learned Single Judge, dated 16.07.2018, the appellant has filed the present Writ Appeal. 9. Sri K. Rathanga Pani Reddy, learned counsel for the appellant and Sri V. Nitesh, learned counsel appearing for the private respondents, in W.A.No.428 of 2019, have taken us through various revenue records and the findings of the Trial Court, in the Suits mentioned above to make out a case in favour of their respective parties. 10. A perusal of the record as well as the material before the learned Single Judge, makes it clear that, this Court would have to undertake an exercise of going into the facts of all the cases and to give findings of fact. Such a course of action, would not be permissible in view of the complicated issues that are being raised by both sides. 11. In these circumstances, it would be appropriate to dispose of both the Writ Appeals, by holding that, the respective properties be kept in the dispute register, maintained by the Revenue Authorities. However, we have now been 10 RRR,J & TCDS,J W.A.Nos.428 & 429 of 2019 informed by the Tahsildar, Mahanandi Mandal, who is personally present in Court that, both the properties are kept in the dispute register. 12. Sri K. Rathanga Pani Reddy, learned counsel appearing for the appellant, would further contend that, the appellant would not be protected in view of the fact that, the Order of the Joint Collector has been set aside, by the learned Single Judge. To allay such apprehension, it is made clear that, neither the Order of the Revenue Divisional Officer nor the Order of the Joint Collector, shall be taken into account by the Revenue Authorities, until a decision is taken by a Competent Court regarding the title and possession over the land. 13. Accordingly, these Writ Appeals are disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs. As a sequel, pending miscellaneous applications, if any, shall stand closed. _______________________ R. RAGHUNANDAN RAO, J ________________ T.C.D. SEKHAR, J Date:25.11.2025 KPV 11 RRR,J & TCDS,J W.A.Nos.428 & 429 of 2019 214 THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE R. RAGHUNANDAN RAO AND THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE T.C.D.SEKHAR WRIT APPEAL Nos.428 & 429 of 2019 (per Hon’ble Sri Justice R. Raghunandan Rao) 25.11.2025 KPV