IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH :: AMARAVATI .. (Special Original Jurisdiction) MONDAY, THE FIFTH DAY OF MAY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE VENKATESWARLU NIMMAGADDA WRIT PETITION NO: 11391 OF 2025 Between: Abdul Malik, S/o. Abdul Sattar, Aged about above 43 years, R/o. D.no. 5-478, Nehru Street, V. Kota Mandal, Chittoor District. ...PETITIONER AND 1. The State of Andhra Pradesh, Rep. by its Principal Secretary, Revenue Department, Secretariat, Amaravathi, Guntur District, Andhra Pradesh The Joint Collector, Chittoor, Chittoor District. The Revenue Divisional officer, Palamaner Division, Chittoor District. The Tahsildar, V.Kota Mandal, Chittoor District. K.Raghupathi, S/o. Kempanna, Aged About 50 Years, R/o.Patrapalli Village, V. Kota Mandal Chittoor District. 2. 3. 4. 5. ...RESPONDENTS Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying that the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased to issue a Writ or Order or Direction, particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus, declaring the action of the respondent no.3, in issuing the notice dated 20.03.2025 vide Roc. D/CTR20241209520/2024 to the petitioner to appear before the 3rd respondent along with connected documents is without any authority of law is illegal, arbitrary and violations of Article 14, 21 and 300A and consequently set aside the notice dated 20.03.2025 vide Roc. D/CTR20241209520/2024 in respect of land in Survey in No. 385/1B, and 0.50 cents in Survey No. 260/1C1, situated at Patrapalli Village, V. Kota Mandal, Chittoor District fourthwith. lA 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 suspend the notice issued by the respondent no.3 in Roc. D/CTR20241209520/2024 dated 20.03.2025 in respect of land in Survey No. 385/IB, and 0.50 cents in Survey No. 260/ICI, situated at Patrapalli Village, V. Kota Mandal, Chittoor District pending disposal of the above writ petition. Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI K SRINIVAS Counsel for the Respondent Nos. 1 to 4: GP FOR REVENUE Counsel for the Respondent No.5: — The Court made the following: ORDER APHC010215072025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3329] MONDAY, THE FIFTH DAY OF MAY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE VENKATESWARLU NIMMAGADDA WRIT PETITION NO: 11391/2025 Between: Abdul Malik, ...PETITIONER AND The State Of Andhra Pradesh and Others ...RESPONDENT(S) Counsel for the Petitioner: 1.KSRINIVAS Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1.GPFOR REVENUE The Court made the following: 2 THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE VENKATESWARLU NIMMAGADDA WRIT PETITION NO: 11391/2025 ORDER: This writ petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of the India seeking the following reliefs;- “to issue pleased to issue a Writ or Order or Direction particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the respondent no 3 in issuing the notice dated 20 03 2025 vide Roc D/CTR20241209520/2024 to the petitioner to appear before the 3rd respondent along with connected documents is without any authority of law is illegal arbitrary and violations of Article 14 21 and 300A and consequently set aside the notice dated 20 03 2025 vide Roc D/CTR20241Z09520/2024 in respect of land in Survey No 385/IB and 0 50 cents in Survey No 260/ICI situated at Patrapalli Village V Kota Mandal Chittoor District fourth with and pass such other order. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned 2. Government Pleader for the respondents. 3. The case of the petitioner herein is that the petitioner is claiming his rights in respect of land Survey No.385/1B and 0.50 cents in Sy.No.260/1 Cl, situated at Patrapalli Village, V.Kota Mandal, Chittoor District having acquired the same through his ancestors and he has been in possession and enjoyment of the property apart from other lands in the said village. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that earlier one Mr 4. Ameer Saheb and eight others preferred an appeal regarding lands in Sy.No.390/7, admeasuring an extent Ac.1.20 cents, Sy.No.385/1 3 admeasuring an extent Ac. 1.75 cents and Sy.No.265/1 Cl admeasuring an extent Ac.0.50 cents of Patrapalle Village, V.Kota Mandal claiming their ownership against the petitioner. The said appeal was dismissed. The claim of the appellants therein was rejected. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that once the claim against the petitioner was rejected in the appeal preferred by third parties. The 3^^ respondent herein is not entitled or empowered to issue notice dated 20.03.2025 directing the petitioner to submit documents to substantiate his claim regarding land in Sy.No.385/IB, an extent of Ac.0.59 cents of Patrapalle Village of V.Kota Mandal, as such the impugned notice is liable to be set aside. Hence the writ petition. Learned Government Pleader for the respondents furnished written instructions dated 24.04.2025 issued by the 2"^^^ respondent, 5. wherein it is stated as follows: '7 submit that the writ petitioner has suppressed the facts about the ROR appeal vide Roc.B/2022/2024, which is pending before the Revenue Divisional Officer, Palamaner against the issuance of Pattadar Passbooks issued in favour of Abdul Malik, who is writ petitioner herein & simply approached the Hon’ble High Court with a plea to suspend the notice vide D/CTR20241209520/2024, dated 20.03.2025 with regard to the lands in Sy. No.385/1B & admeasuring an extent Ac.0.50 Cents in Sy.No.260/1C1 of Patrapalli Village of V.Kota Mandal but the above said notice was VT- issued only with regard to the land in Sy.No.385/1B, admeasuring an extent Ac.0.59 Cents of Patrapalle Village of V.Kota Mandal & same was already disposed vide this office endorsement dt.25.03.2025.” 6. Having regard to the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioner and on perusal of the written instructions submitted by the learned Government Pleader for the respondents, contended by the petitioner that once the 3'^^ respondent dismissed an appeal preferred against the petitioner regarding the subject land, the very same authority is not entitled to issue the petitioner regarding same subject property on the ground that another party made a complaint lacks merit. The un-official respondent claims over the said property by multiple persons herein claiming rights over the subject property and the issuance of notice is without jurisdiction and is liable to be set aside cannot be accepted. It is observed that the schedule property of the as same notice to present appeal filed by the third parties is not the subject land against which an appeal is already disposed of. Therefore, the claim notice was issued by the 3^*^ of the petitioner that, again a respondent regarding same subject property is not true and correct. Hence, it is observed that the subject property in the notice and the claimed by the appellant in the appeal is not one and the property as same. 5 On the perusal of the written instructions submitted by the learned Government Pleader, the notice issued by the 3'^^ respondent in respect of Sy.No.385/1B, an extent of Ac.0.59 cents of Patrapalle Village of V.Kota Mandal is one of the other land of petitioner therefore the issuance of notice by 3'"^ respondent is within jurisdiction. The 3'^^ respondent is at liberty to proceed in accordance with law. Hence, there is no bar against 3'^ respondent to conduct enquiry afresh, if any claim or complaint received from another claimant. ' 7. In view of the facts and circumstances, the petitioner herein is directed to submit an explanation and substantiate his claim over the subject property by providing and furnishing all the documents whatever he relied upon within a period of four (4) weeks from the date of receipt of copy of the order and after such submission, the 3''‘ respondent shall consider the same and pass appropriate order after providing opportunity of hearing to both the parties, within a period of four (04) months from the date of receipt of such explanation. In the meanwhile, status-quo obtaining as on today shall be maintained by all the parties concerned in respect of possession of the schedule property of the notice. With the above directions, the Writ Petition is disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs. 8. 6. 6 As a sequel miscellaneous application, pending, if any, shall’ also stand closed. Sd/-SHAIK MOHD RAF! ASSISTANT REGISTRAR //TRUE COPY// TtOFTOFFICER SEC To 1. The Principal Secretary, Revenue Department, Secretariat, Amaravathi Guntur District, Andhra Pradesh 2. The Joint Collector, Chittoor, Chittoor District. 3. The Revenue Divisional officer, Palamaner Division, Chittoor District. 4. The Tahsildar, V.Kota Mandal, Chittoor District. 5. One CC to Sri K Srinivas Advocate [OPUC] 6. Two CCS to GP for Revenue, High Court of Andhra Pradesh. [OUT] 7. Three CD Copies TF ▼ ' HIGH COURT DATED:05/05/2025 ORDER WP.No.11391 of 2025 DISPOSING OF THE W.P., WITHOUT COSTS