APHC010101472020 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3332] MONDAY,THE THIRTEENTH DAY OF OCTOBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE RAVI CHEEMALAPATI WRIT PETITION NO: 6151/2020 Between: 1. P. VENKATA LAKSHMI KRISHNAVENI, W/O LATE P. SUBBA RAO AGED 60 YEARS R/O 1-108-13, PLOT NO. 188, KAMALA NILAYAM SECTOR 8, NEAR SRI SATYA SAI VIDYA VIHAR MVP COLONY, VISAKHAPATNAM 2. P.V.R. GIRIDHAR, S/O LATE P. SUBBA RAO AGED 29 YEARS R/O 1-108-13, PLOT NO. 188, KAMALA NILAYAM SECTOR 8, NEAR SRI SATYA SAI VIDYA VIHAR MVP COLONY, VISAKHAPATNAM 3. P.V.N.S.R. PRATYUSHA, D/O LATE P. SUBBA RAO AGED 24 YEARS R/O 1-108-13, PLOT NO. 188. KAMALA NILAYAM SECTOR 8, NEAR SRI SATYA SAI VIDYA VIHAR MVP COLONY, VISAKHAPATNAM ...PETITIONER(S) AND 1. STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT REVENUE DEPARTMENT SECRETARIAT AT AMARAVATHI 2. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, VISAKHAPATNAM 3. THE DISTRICT REGISTRAR, VISAKHAPATNAM 4. THE SUBREGISTRAR, MADHURAWADA, VISAKHAPATNAM ...RESPONDENT(S): 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 an appropriate writ or order or direction more particularly one in the nature of WRIT OF MANDAMUS declaring the action of the Respondents in notifying the Petitioners property in an extent of 200 Sq.Yds. situate at S.No. 329, Madhurawada Village, Plot No. 53, part of Layout Plan No. 2612014 of Surya Sakthi Nagar laid by Sri Krishna Cooperative Society,Visakhapatnam, Visakhapatnam District without notice and opportunity contrary to the provisions of Section 22A(1)(b) of the Registration Act as illegal, arbitrary, violative of article 14, 21 and 300A of Constitution of India and issue consequential directions to the Respondents to denotify the Petitioners property in an extent of 200 Sq.Yds. Situate at S.No. 329, Madhurawada Village, Plot No. 53, part of Layout Plan No. 26/2014 of Surya Sakthi Nagar laid by Sri Krishna Cooperative Society, Visakhapatnam, Visakhapatnam District from the Prohibited List under Section 22A(1)(b) of the Registration Act 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 direct the Respondents 3 and 4 to register and release the sale deed or any other such document as recognized by Law or compulsory registerable document under Registration Act presented by the petitioners in respect of their property in an extent of 200 Sq.Yds. situate at Plot No. 53 part of Layout Plan No. 26/2014 of Surya Sakthi Nagar laid by Sri Krishna Cooperative Society in S.No. 329, Madhurawada Village, Visakhapatnam, Visakhapatnam District covered by Sale Deed No. 3846 of 2005 dated 31.10.2005 registered with the office of the 4th Respondent IA NO: 1 OF 2022 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 direct the Registry to list the matter for an early hearing and pass Counsel for the Petitioner(S): 1. K SRINIVASA RAO Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. GP FOR REGISTRATION AND STAMPS (AP) The Court made the following: ORDER: Notifying the petitioners property to an extent of 200 Sq.Yards situated at Plot No.53, Part of Layout Plan No.26/2014 of Surya Sakthi Nagar laid by Sri Krishna Cooperative Society in S.No.329, Madhurawada Village, Visakhapatnam, Visakhapatnam District, in prohibited properties list without notice and opportunity contrary to the provisions of Section 22A(1)(b) of the Registration Act, as illegal, arbitrary, the present writ petition is filed. 2. Heard Sri K.Srinivasa Rao, learned counsel for the petitioners and Ms.Vijayeswari, learned Assistant Government Pleader for the respondents. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioners while reiterating the contents of the affidavit contended that the respondents, without issuing any notice or opportunity of hearing to the petitioners the respondents have notified the subject land under Section 22A(1)(b) of the Registration Act, 1908, and if the said action of the respondents is allowed to continue, it will affect the rights of the petitioners. He further submitted that the writ petition was filed in the year 2020 and till now the respondents did not choose to file their counters, as such, prayed to pass appropriate orders protecting the interest of the petitioners. 4. On the other hand, learned Assistant Government Pleader submitted that the petitioners without approaching the authorities concerned straight away knocked the doors of this Court, as such, this Court cannot adjudicate the same under 226 of Constitution of India. She further submitted that if the petitioners approach the authority concerned, the authorities would consider the same in accordance with law. Accordingly, prayed to dismiss the writ petition. 5. Perused the record and considered the submissions made by both the learned counsel. 6. To entertain a writ of mandamus, it is a pre-condition that the aggrieved person should have approached the authorities competent against whom such a direction is sought for and the said representation / appeal acknowledged by the authorities competent must be available in the file of the authority concerned. This being the mandatory requirement for the purpose of entertaining a writ petition to direct the authorities concerned to consider the representation. The person, who files a writ petition, should establish that he has established the legal rights for the purpose of redressing his grievances before the competent authority. In other words, it is a precondition that the person, who files a writ petition, should establish the legal rights for the purpose of approaching the competent authority as well as the High Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. 7. In the present case, the petitioners, without approaching the authority concerned, have straight away filed the present writ petition, as such, this Court instead of adjudicating the same, is inclined to dispose of the writ petition granting liberty to the petitioners to make appropriate representation to the concerned authority in accordance with law within a period of four (04) weeks by enclosing all the documents in support of their claim. On such representation being made, the authority concerned shall consider the same as per the rules in vogue and if required by giving an opportunity of being heard to the petitioners within a period of three (03) months thereafter. 8. Accordingly, 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. _____________________________ JUSTICE RAVI CHEEMALAPATI Date: 13th October, 2025 RKS