::1:: APHC010227892025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3208] FRIDAY,THE SEVENTH DAY OF NOVEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE D RAMESH WRIT PETITION NO: 11907/2025 Between: 1. KALI CHINNA RATNA RAJU @ RATNA RAJU, S/O.YANOKU, AGED ABOUT 60 YEARS, OCCAGRICULTURE, R/O.D.NO.2-168, TAKKELLAPADU VILLAGE, TAKKELLAPADU MANDAL, ELURU DISTRICT. ...PETITIONER AND 1. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP.BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY - REVENUE SECRETARIAT, VELAGAPUDI, GUNTUR DISTRICT. 2. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, ELURU, ELURU DISTRICT. 3. THE ASSISTANT DIRECTOR OF SURVEY, ELURU, ELURU DISTRICT. 4. THE TAHSILDAR, MANDAVALLI MANDAL, ELURU DISTRICT. 5. THE MANDAL SURVEYOR, MANDAVALLI TAHSILDAR OFFICE, MANDAVALLI, MANDAVALLI MANDAL, ELURU DISTRICT. ...RESPONDENT(S): ::2:: This Court made the following ORDER: This Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India by the Petitioners for the following relief: “.. to issue a Writ of Mandamus, or any other appropriate writ, order or direction, declaring the action of the 4th respondent in issuing proceedings dated 27.03.2025 rejecting F-Line application submitted my daughter Mutrapu Sunemi in application NO.FSNV012500675816 without verifying the records as illegal, arbitrary and violation of Articles 14, 21 and 300-A of the Constitution of India and consequently set aside the same and further direct the 4th respondent to reconsider the F-Line application submitted by the petitioner daughter Mutrapu Sunemi in application No.FSNV012500675816 pertaining the land in an extent of Ac.0.34 cents in Sy.No.19-2A of Takkellapadu Village, Mandavalli Mandal, Eluru District and pass…” 2. The grievance of the petitioner is that the 4th respondent, by issuing proceedings dated 27.03.2025, rejected the F-Line application submitted by the petitioner’s daughter, Mutrapu Sunemi, without verifying the relevant records, stating that the applicant’s name is not reflected in the revenue records and that the petitioner is not in possession of the subject property. The said action of the 4th respondent is illegal and arbitrary. Hence, the present Writ Petition. ::3:: 3. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Government Pleader for Revenue appearing for the respondents. 4. Considering the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioner, and in view of the rejection proceedings/order dated 27.03.2025 issued by the 4th respondent pursuant to the F-line application of the petitioner, it is noted that the patta was originally granted in favour of the petitioner. Subsequently, the property was mutated in the name of the petitioner’s daughter by way of a gift deed. Accordingly, the revenue records now stand in the name of the petitioner’s daughter, Mutrapu Sunemi. 5. In view of the same, the Writ Petition is disposed of, granting liberty to the petitioner or the person whose name stands in the revenue records to file an online application before the concerned authorities seeking appropriate relief in accordance with law. No costs. As a sequel, interlocutory applications if any pending, shall stand closed. ________________________ JUSTICE D. RAMESH Dt:07.11.2025 klk ::4:: THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE D RAMESH WRIT PETITION No.11907 of 2025 Dt:07.11.2025 krk 98