APHC010259522024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH THURSDAY, TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE TARLADA RAJASEKHAR RAO WRIT PETITION N BETWEEN: 1. K V V S PRASADA RAO, S/ YEARS, R/o VISAKHAPATNAM DISTRICT. 1. THE STATE OF AP, REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, REVENUE DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT, AMARAVATHI, GUNTUR DISTRICT. 2. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, VISAKHAPATNAM DISTRICT, VISAKHAPATNAM. 3. THE REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER, VISAKHAPATNAM RURAL, VISAKHAPATNAM DISTRICT. 4. THE TAHASILDAR, PENDURTHI MANDAL, VISAKHAPATNAM DISTRICT. 5. THE COMMISSIONER OF ENDOMENTS, GOVERNMENT OF ANDHRA PRADESH, GOLLAPUDI VIJAYAWADA, KRISHNA DISTRICT. 6. S V L N DEVASTHANAM, SIMHACHALAM REP. BY ITS EXECUTIVE OFFICER, SIMHACHALAM, VISAKHAPATNAM DISTRICT. 7. THE SUBREGISTRAR, PENDURTHI DISTRICT. IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) THURSDAY, THE SIXTEENTH DAY OF OCTOBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE TARLADA RAJASEKHAR RAO WRIT PETITION No. 12911/2024 K V V S PRASADA RAO, S/o. LATE SUBBARAO, AGE 56 o. PLOT No.501, SHEELA NAGAR, VISAKHAPATNAM DISTRICT. ...PETITIONER AND THE STATE OF AP, REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, REVENUE DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT, VELAGAPUDI, AMARAVATHI, GUNTUR DISTRICT. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, VISAKHAPATNAM DISTRICT, VISAKHAPATNAM. THE REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER, VISAKHAPATNAM RURAL, VISAKHAPATNAM DISTRICT. THE TAHASILDAR, PENDURTHI MANDAL, VISAKHAPATNAM DISTRICT. THE COMMISSIONER OF ENDOMENTS, GOVERNMENT OF ANDHRA PRADESH, GOLLAPUDI VIJAYAWADA, KRISHNA S V L N DEVASTHANAM, SIMHACHALAM REP. BY ITS EXECUTIVE OFFICER, SIMHACHALAM, VISAKHAPATNAM THE SUBREGISTRAR, PENDURTHI VISAKHAPATNAM ...RESPONDENT(S): IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH [3330] THE SIXTEENTH DAY OF OCTOBER THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE TARLADA RAJASEKHAR RAO . LATE SUBBARAO, AGE 56 .501, SHEELA NAGAR, ...PETITIONER THE STATE OF AP, REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, VELAGAPUDI, THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, VISAKHAPATNAM DISTRICT, THE REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER, VISAKHAPATNAM THE TAHASILDAR, PENDURTHI MANDAL, THE COMMISSIONER OF ENDOMENTS, GOVERNMENT OF ANDHRA PRADESH, GOLLAPUDI VIJAYAWADA, KRISHNA S V L N DEVASTHANAM, SIMHACHALAM REP. BY ITS EXECUTIVE OFFICER, SIMHACHALAM, VISAKHAPATNAM VISAKHAPATNAM ...RESPONDENT(S): 2 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 order direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declare the action of the respondents including the petitioners land covered in R.S.No.36/1 an extent of Ac. 1.00 Cents situated at Cheemulapalli Village of Pendurthi Mandal, Visakhapatnam District in the prohibitary list U/s 22-A(1)(e) of the Registration Act as Illegal, arbitrary and contrary to the provisions of Registration Act and consequently direct the respondents to delete the petitioners land by considering his representation dated 06/10/2023 and to pass such other order ororders. Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. P R K AMERANDRA KUMAR Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. CHINTAPALLI SRINIVAS 2. GP FOR REVENUE 3. GP FOR ENDOWMENTS The Court made the following: 3 ORDER: Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that after knowing the fact that the land in RS.No.36/1 to an extent of Ac.1.00 cents placed in prohibition list under Section 22 A of the Registration Act, the petitioner made an application to the Tahsildar, Pendurthi Mandal, requesting him to de-notify the land from the purview under Section 22A Register. On such application the Tahsildar of Pendurthi Mandal, in his proceedings R.C.No.77/2023/A Dt.28/01/2023 addressed a letter to the Executive Officer Sri S.V.L.N.S. Devasthanam, Simhachalam, to submit a report. Though report was submitted no steps have been taken to de-notify the scheduled land from the prohibitory list. Hence, petitioner submitted a representation on 16.10.2023 to the District Collector, Visakhapatnam, being a chairman of the Committee to de-notify the scheduled land from the prohibitory list. Though, the application was received by the 2nd respondent, no steps have been taken. Challenging the action of the 2nd Respondent in not considering the application dated 16.10.2023 for deletion of the land from the prohibitory list, the petitioner approached this Court by way of filing Writ Petition No.30868 of 2023. But in the said Writ Petition there are 4 no proper respondents. Hence, the said writ petition was withdrawn with a liberty to file a fresh Writ Petition, accordingly permission was granted to withdraw the Writ Petition and to file a fresh Writ Petition. If the respondents may continue the scheduled land in the prohibitory list, the petitioner will be put to irreparable loss and hardship. Hence, the present Writ Petition is filed to direct the respondents to de-notify the land in the above survey number, from prohibited list of properties. 2. The 4th respondent-Tahsildar filed counter affidavit asserting that under Section 22-A(1)(c) the list of properties owned by religious and charitable endowments falling under the purview of A.P. Charitable and Hindu Religious Institutions and Endowments Act, 1987 shall be furnished by the Commissioner Endowments or CEO Waqf board as the case may be to the Registering Officer having jurisdiction over such property and also to the District Registrar concerned of Registration and Stamps Department in the Proforma appended to Annexure-III and subsequent additions if any also shall be sent in the same manner. The lists must be signed by the Commissioner of Endowments or CEO Waqf board as the case may be. As such, it is evident that the Writ Petitioner has to approach appropriate forum i.e. Respondent No.5, who is the authority to take steps for de-notification of subject property. 5 3. Disposal of proceedings by seemingly innocuous orders directing consideration of representation though result in quick or easy disposal of cases in overburdened adjudicatory institutions but such orders do more disservice than service to the cause of justice as held by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Government of India and another vs. P. Venkatesh1 4. However, the respondents are directed to consider the petitioner's representation dated 16.10.2023, examine thoroughly, issue orders accordingly, and communicate the decision to the petitioner. It goes without saying that the entire process will be completed within three months from the date of receipt of the order. 5. Accordingly, the Writ Petition is disposed of. However, no costs. As a sequel, interlocutory applications, if any pending in this Writ Petition shall stand closed. ___________________________________ JUSTICE TARLADA RAJASEKHAR RAO Date: 16.10.2025 Harin 1 (2019) 15 SCC 613 6 55 THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE TARLADA RAJASEKHAR RAO W.P.No. 12911 OF 2024 Date: 16-10-2025 Harin