IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH::AMARA' (Special Original Jurisdiction) i •f' 'Jk 'or V. m THURSDAY, THE TWENTY FOURTH DAY OF TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE VENKATESWARLU NIMMAGADDA WRIT PETITION NO: 24844 OF 2024 Between: 1. B Munirathnam Naidu, S/o. Krishnama Naidu, aged about 73 years, Occ Agriculture, R/o. Padirikuppam (V), Varadaiahpalem (M), Chittoor District. ' 2. B. Munirathnamma, W/o. dovindaswamy Naidu, aged about 59 years, Occ Agriculture, R/o. Padirikuppam (V), Varadaiahpalem (M), Chittoor District. 3. B.Jayasanker, S/o. Govindaswamy Naidu, aged about 49 years, Occ Agriculture, R/o. Padirikuppam (V), Varadaiahpalem (M), Chittoor District. 4. B.Parvathamma, W/o. Nagafathnamma Naidu, aged about 77 years Occ Agriculture, R/o. Padirikuppam (V), Varadaiahpalem (M), Chittoor District. ; 5. N.Babu, S/o. Nagarathnam Naidu, aged about 59 years, Occ Agriculture, R/o. Padirikuppam (V), Varadaiahpalem (M), Chittoor District. 6. B.Sugunamma @ Suguna, W/o. Narasimhulu Naidu, aged about 60 years, Occ Agriculture, R/6. Padirikuppam (V), Varadaiahpalem (M), Chittoor District. 7. Geetha, D/o. Narasimhulu Naidu, aged about 40 years, Occ Agriculture, R/o. Padirikuppam (V), Varadaiahpalem (M), Chittoor District. 8. B.Rosi, D/o. B.Narasimhulu Naidu, aged about 37 years, Occ Agriculture, R/o. Padirikuppam (V), Varadaiahpalem (M), Chittoor District. 9. Jayalakshmi @ Bujji, D/o. B Narasimhulu Naidu, aged about 34 years, Occ Agriculture, R/o. Padirikuppam (V), Varadaiahpalem (M), Chittoor District. 10. B.Munaswamy Naidu, S/o. Krishnama Naidu, aged about 74 years, Occ Agriculture, R/o. Padirikup’fiam (V), Varadaiahpalem (M), Chittoor District. lI.Raju, S/o. Yanadhi Naidu, aged about 38 years, Occ Agriculture, R/o. Padirikuppam (V), Varadaiahpalem (M), Chittoor District. 12.Sivaiah, S/o. Kondaiah, aged about 34 years, Occ Agriculture, R/o. Padirikuppam (V), Varadaiahpalem (M), Chittoor District. 13.Seenudu, S/o. T.Chengaiah Naidu, aged about 35 years, Occ Agriculture, R/o. Padirikuppam (V), Varadaiahpalem (M), Chittoor District. Rep. by their Agent-cum-Agreement holder M/s. Woodlands Projects Private Limited, a company registered under the Companies Act, having its registered office at G.02, Elite Heights Asif Avenue, Rajbhavan Road, Somajiguda, Hyderabad, vide Award Dated 08.11.2017 in P.L.P. No.68/2017 on the file of Bench of Lok Adalat, Sathyavedu, Tirupathi District (Erstwhile Chittoor District) Rep. by its Director Sabbineni Vishnu Teja, S/o. S.Surendra, aged about 31 years. ...Petitioners AND 1. The State of Andhra Pradesh, Rep by its Principal Secretary, Revenue Department, AP Secretariat, Velagapudi, Amaravati, Guntur District, A.P 2. The District Collector, Chittoor District, Chittoor, A.P. 3. The Joint Collector, District, A.P 4. The Tahsildar, Varadaiahpalem Mandal, Chittoor District Settlement Officer, Chittoor, Chittoor cum ...Respondents 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 a Writ, Order or direction more particularly one in the nature of WRIT OF MANDAMUS declaring the inaction of the 3rd Respondent in granting statutory Patta U/s.13 and 15 of the A.P. (Andh Area) Estates (Abolition and Conversion into Ryotwari) act, 1948 on the light of the specific directions issued by this Hon’ble court in WP No 9294 of 2012, dated 1.7.2017 as well as WA No 1643 of 2017 dated 16.12.2019 being remanded the matter by the learned principal District Judge Cum Arbitration Tribunal Chittoor Dated 13.10.2022 vide EATAS No 4 of 2021 illegal arbitrary non est perverse and contrary to law and moreover against the orders passed by this Hon’ble Court in WP No 9294 of 2012, dated 1.7.2017 as well as WA No 1643 of 2017 dated 16.12.2019 and consequently direct the 3rd respondent to issue pattas U/s 13 and 15 of the AP (andhra Area) Estates (abolition and Conversion into Ryotwari) Act, ra on as ¥ 1948 treating the village padirikuppam as an inam Estate as held by this Hon’ble court in the interest of justice lA NO: 1 OF 2024 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 operation of the proceedings issued by the 3'”'^ Respondent vide S.R.No.4/ 15(1)/97, dated 31.3.2021, pending disposal of the above Writ petition, in the interest of justice lA NO: 2 OF 2024 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 3'^ Respondent to issue Pattas U/s. 13 and 15 of the A.P. (Andhra Area) Estates (Abolition & Conversion into Ryotwari) Act, 1948 treating the village Padirikuppam as an Inam Estate as held by this Hon’ble Court in W.P.No.9294 of 2012, dated 1.7.2017 as well as W.A. No.1643 of 2017 dt.16.12.2019, pending disposal of the above writ petition, in the interest of justice Counsel for the Petitioners: SRI SUDHAKARA RAO AMBATI Counsel for the Respondents No.1 to 4: GP FOR REVENUE The Court made the following: Order APHC010482812024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3329] Sh THURSDAY ,THE TWENTY FOURTH DAY OF APRIL TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE VENKATESWARLU NIMMAGADDA WRIT PETITION NO: 24844/2024 Between: 1. B MUNIRATHNAM NAIDU, S/0. KRISHNAMA NAIDU, AGED ABOUT 73 YEARS, OCC AGRICULTURE, R/0. PADIRIKUPPAM (V), VARADAIAHPALEM (M), CHITTOOR DISTRICT. 2. B. MUNI RATH NAM MA„ W/0. GOVINDASWAMY NAIDU AGED ABOUT 59 YEARS, OCC AGRICULTURE, R/O. PADIRIKUPPAM (V), VARADAIAHPALEM (M), CHITTOOR DISTRICT. 3. B.JAYASANKER, S/0. GOVINDASWAMY NAIDU, AGED ABOUT 49 YEARS, OCC AGRICULTURE, R/O. PADIRIKUPPAM (V), VARADAIAHPALEM (M), CHITTOOR DISTRICT. 4. B.PARVATHAMMA, W/0. NAGARATHNAMMA NAIDU, AGED ABOUT 77 YEARS OCC AGRICULTURE, R/O. PADIRIKUPPAM (V), VARADAIAHPALEM (M), CHITTOOR DISTRICT. 5. N.BABU, S/0. NAGARATHNAM NAIDU, AGED ABOUT 59 YEARS, AGRICULTURE, VARADAIAHPALEM (M), CHITTOOR DISTRICT. 6. B.SUGUNAMMA @ SUGUNA, W/0. NARASIMHULU NAIDU, AGED ABOUT 60 YEARS, OCC AGRICULTURE, R/O. PADIRIKUPPAM (V), VARADAIAHPALEM (M), CHITTOOR DISTRICT. 7. GEETHA, D/0. NARASIMHULU NAIDU, AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS, AGRICULTURE, VARADAIAHPALEM (M), CHITTOOR DISTRICT. 8. B.ROSI, D/O. B.NARASIMHULU NAIDU, AGED ABOUT 37 YEARS, OCC R/O. PADIRIKUPPAM (V), OCC R/O. PADIRIKUPPAM (V). 2 occ AGRICULTURE, VARADAIAHPALEM (M), CHITTOOR DISTRICT. R/0. PADIRIKUPPAM (V) 9. JAYALAKSHMI @ BUJJI, D/0. B.NARASIMHULU NAIDU, AGED ABOUT 34 YEARS, OCC AGRICULTURE, R/0. PADIRIKUPPAM (V), VARADAIAHPALEM (M), CHITTOOR DISTRICT. 10.B.MUNASWAMY NAIDU, S/0. KRISHNAMA NAIDU, AGED ABOUT OCC AGRICULTURE, R/0. PADIRIKUPPAM (V), VARADAIAHPALEM (M), CHITTOOR DISTRICT. 11.RAJU, S/0. YANADHI NAIDU, AGED ABOUT 38 YEARS, AGRICULTURE, R/0. PADIRIKUPPAM (V), VARADAIAHPALEM (M), CHITTOOR DISTRICT. 12.SIVAIAH, S/0. KONDAIAH, AGED ABOUT 34 YEARS. AGRICULTURE, R/0. PADIRIKUPPAM (V), VARADAIAHPALEM (M), CHITTOOR DISTRICT. 13.SEENUDU, S/0. T.CHENGAIAH NAIDU, AGED ABOUT 35 YEARS, AGRICULTURE, VARADAIAHPALEM (M), CHITTOOR DISTRICT. AGENT-CUM-AGREEMENT HOLDER PROJECTS PRIVATE LIMITED, UNDER THE COMPANIES ACT, HAVING ITS REGISTERED OFFICE AT G.02, ELITE HEIGHTS ASIF AVENUE, RAJBHAVAN ROAD, SOMAJIGUDA, HYDERABAD 08.11.2017 IN P.L.P. NO.68/2017 ON THE FILE OF BENCH OF LOK ADALAT, SATHYAVEDU, TIRUPATHI DISTRICT (ERSTWHILE CHITTOOR DISTRICT) REP. BY ITS DIRECTOR SABBINENI VISHNU TEJA, S/0. S.SURENDRA, AGED ABOUT 31 YEARS, ...PETITIONER(S) 74 YEARS, OCC OCC OCC R/0. PADIRIKUPPAM (V) REP. BY THEIR M/S. WOODLANDS A COMPANY REGISTERED VIDE AWARD DATED AND 1.THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, VEIAGAPUDI, AMARAVATI, GUNTUR DISTRICT, A.P 2.THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, CHITTOOR DISTRICT. CHITTOOR, REVENUE DEPARTMENT, AP SECRETARIAT. A.P. 3.THE JOINT COLLECTOR. CUM - SETTLEMENT OFFICER 3 CHITTOOR, CHITTOOR DISTRICT, A.P 4.THE TAHSILDAR, VARADAIAHPALEM MANDAL, CHITTOOR DISTRICT ...RESPONDENT(S): Counsel for the Petitioner(S); 1.SUDHAKARA RAO AMBATI Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1.GP FOR REVENUE The Court made the following: This writ petition is filed under Article 226 seeking the following relief; of the Constitution of India the nature of WRIT OF ’MANDAMUS^f'T Particularly one In ResFonnent In (Andhra Area) Estates (Ahniitir.^ ^ T 1948 on the light of the soecifirH- Ryotwari) act, Court in .WP.No.9294 of 2012 Hon’ble '^■^■Ro.1643 of 2017,a(el76 2 20 0 7'°'^ ^ St:“ "r 's:,r as and village court in the 2- The case of the petitioners i•s that, initially, the subject lands which are .«»«, p.«,fcpp.„ ^ ^ 7“ “”»■'« «'« ». p.„., ^ ^ ..P.A,.„ P.„.. „„„p. ^ came into operation, the tenure Settlement Officer-Ill, Chittoor proceedings dated 31.07.1950, that estate within the Village , 1948 of Padirikuppam was examined by the then under Section 9 of the Act and he held, by the village of Padirikuppam is not an inam meaning of the Act. He further held that this village is not an estate. Then, an amendment was brought to the Act in the year 1957. By 5 4^ virtue of the said amendment, estates affected by the 1936 amendments included in the definition of “estate.” Then, by virtue of the amendment Government notified the above said village as an inam estate. Therefore, the petitioners preferred an appeal vide A.S. No. 17/1964 before the District Judge-cum-Estate Abolition Tribunal, Chittoor, against the orders of the Settlement Officer. The said appeal was allowed and the orders of the Settlement Officer were set aside. Aggrieved by the order in the above said appeal, the State of Andhra Pradesh preferred Writ Petition No. 4127 of 1969 before this Court, which was allowed vide orders dated 07.09.1973. Against the said orders in W.P. No. 4127 of 1969, a writ appeal in W.A. No. 275 of 1974 was preferred by the claimants, which was dismissed vide orders. were the Subsequently, an SLP was preferred before the Hon’ble Supreme Court. While things stood thus, the petitioners filed a claim application on 16.07.1978 before the Settlement Officer for Pursuant to the said application, the Settlement Officer endorsement dated 04.12.1980, grant of Ryotwari pattas. gave a subject which was challenged by the petitioners/claimants by filing EAT No. 2/1981 before the District Judge- Estates (Abolition Tribunal), which cum- was allowed, setting aside the endorsement of the Assistant Settlement Officer dated 04.12.1980 directing the Assistant Settlement Officer to hold an enquiry to consider the applications of the petitioners, which was pending. Subsequently, the claim of the petitioners was dismissed. Aggrieved by the orders of the Settlement Officer, the petitioners preferred W.P. No. 9294 of 2012. This Court allowed and the writ petition by way of orders dated 01.06.2017, setting aside the order dated 31.03.2011 of the 2nd respondent therein and directing the 2nd respondent to consider the case of the petitioners for grant of Ryotwari patta. Aggrieved by the orders in W.P. No. 9294 of 2012, the State of Andhra Pradesh preferred an appeal in W.A. No. 1643 of 2017. The Hon'ble Division Bench dismissed the writ appeal, confirming the orders of the learned Single Judge. In pursuance of the orders passed by the Division Bench of this Court, the petitioners herein filed an application. The said application was dismissed by the 3rd respondent vide orders dated 31.03.2021. Aggrieved by the above said orders, the petitioners filed EATAS No. 4 of 2001 before the Principal District Judge-cum-Arbitration Tribunal, and the said appeal was allowed in part and the matter was remitted back to the 3rd respondent to decide the matter afresh by giving an opportunity to the petitioners to adduce evidence on their behalf. So far, no orders have been issued by the 3rd respondent. Hence, the writ petition. 3. The learned counsel for the petitioners submits that, despite specific directions issued by this Hon’ble Court in W.P. No. 9294 of 2012 and W.A. No. 1643 of 2017, the 3rd respondent has not issued Ryotwari Sections 13 and 15 of the A.P. (Andhra Area) Estates (Abolition Conversion into Ryotwari) Act, 1948, treating Padirikuppam Village estate. He further submits that an appropriate direction may be issued to the 3rd respondent to consider the case of the petitioners in accordance with law. pattas under and as an mam 7 4 On the other hand, the learned Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue appearing for the respondents furnished written instructions dated 06.11.2024, wherein it is stated that:- In this connection it is submitted that, Sri.Govindaswamy Naidu and others filed claim petition before the Joint Collector. Chittoor for granting of Settlement patta U/s 15(1) of E.A. Act 1948, for the lands in Sy. No. 6, 12 etc of Padirikuppam village of Varadaiahpalem Manda.l As per the orders of the Hon'ble High Court in W.P No 9294/2012, Dt:01.07.2017 and W.A.No. 1643/2017, Dt:16.12.2019, the then Joint Collector Cum Settlement Officer, Chittoor has declared the subject lands Government lands and rejected the claim of the petitioners vide SR No.4/15(1)/97, Dt:31.03.2021.Aggrived by the above orders, Sri.B.Munirathnama and 12 others filed appeal before the Estate Abolition Tribunal, Chittoor in EATAS No 4/2021, the same was remanded to the JC Cum SO, Tirupati vide EATAS No.4/2021, Dt: 13.10.2022. One I 1 \ as It is further submitted that, the case was taken on file and Issued notice to the petitioners to attend for enquiry 26.10.2024 with all the documentary evidences pertaining to their claim over the land. on The petitioner’s counsel filed vakalath and request for 3 weeks time. At present the case is under enquiry. 5. Having regard to the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue appearing for the respondents, on perusal of the material available on record, this court is of the considered view that, the writ petition is disposed of by directing the 3'"’ respondent to consider and dispose of the EATAS No.4 of 2021 preferred by the petitioners and pass appropriate orders in accordance with law within a period of six (06) months from the date of receipt of the copy of this order after providing an opportunity of hearing to the petitioners. 8 6. With the above direction, the writ petition is disposed of. No As a sequel, interlocutory applications if costs. any pending, shall stand closed. Sd/- A VENUGOPALA RAO assistant ^strar SECTION OFFICER //TRUE COPY// To 1 The Principal Secretary De^partment, AP Secretariat. 2. The District Collector, Chittoor District, 3. The Joint Collector - District, A.P 4. The Tahsildar, Varadaiahpalem Mandal, 5. One CC to SRI SUDHAKARA RAO 6. Two CCs to GP FOR REVENUE, 7. Three CD Copies Ttol® “''^.Andhra Pradesh, Revenue Velagapudi, Amaravati, Guntur District, / Chittoor, A.P. - Settlement Officer, Chittoor. cum Chittoor Chittoor District AMBATI Advocate [OPUC] High Court of Andhra Pradesh [OUT] gsg HIGH COURT DATED: 24/04/2025 ORDER WP.No.24844 of 2024 DISPOSING THE WP WITHOUT COSTS