Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Andhra Pradesh · body

2025 DAILYLAW 52384 (AP)

Voguboina Suribabu, v. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH

WP/25382/2025 · 2025-09-17

Tarlada Rajasekhar Rao

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

APHC010476522025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3330] THURSDAY, THE EIGHTEENTH DAY OF SEPTEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE TARLADA RAJASEKHAR RAO WRIT PETITION NO: 25382/2025 Between: 1. VOGUBOINA SURIBABU,, S/O LATE RAMA AVATARAM, AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS, R/O NARASINGABILLI VILLAGE, KASIMKOTA MANDAL, ANAKAPALLI DISTRICT. 2. VOGUBOINA LAKSHMI,, W/O LATE PRASAD, AGED ABOUT 41 YEARS, R/O NARASINGABILLI VILLAGE, KASIMKOTA MANDAL, ANAKAPALLI DISTRICT. 3. VOGUBOINA VENKATA SURIBABU, , S/O LATE PRASAD, AGED ABOUT 20 YEARS, R/O NARASINGABILLI VILLAGE, KASIMKOTA MANDAL, ANAKAPALLI DISTRICT. ...PETITIONER(S) AND 1. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, REVENUE DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT BUILDINGS, VELAGAPUDI, AMARAVATHI, GUNTUR DISTRICT. 2. THE REVISIONAL AUTHORITY AND JOINT COLLECTOR, ANAKAPALLI, ANAKAPALLI DISTRICT. 3. THE REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER, ANAKAPALLI, ANAKAPALLI DISTRICT. 4. THE TAHSILDAR, YELLAMANCHALLI MANDAL, ANAKAPALLI DISTRICT. 5. KONA MARUTHI SUNEETHA MADHURI, W/O. ARJUNARAO, AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS, R/O. D.NO. 5-4-9, KAPU THUNGALAM, BHPV POST, GAJUWAKA MANDAL, VISAKHAPATNAM, VISAKHAPATNAM DISTRICT. 6. KOVELAPALLI KESAVARAO, S/O LATE SOMUNAIDU, AGED ABOUT 68 YEARS, R/O. APPAYYAPALEM VILLAGE, RAMBILLI MANDAL, ANAKAPALLI DISTRICT ...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 tomay be pleased to issue a writ of Mandamus or any other appropriate writ to declaring the action of the 2nd respondent in not disposing the revision petition filed by the petitioners u/s. 9 of AP Rights in Land and Pattadar Pass Books Act, 1971 is illegal, improper, unjust, arbitrary and violative of the principles of natural justice and further direct the respondents not to disturb the petitioners possession and enjoyment of the land in S.No. 502/4 of Yellamanchili Village, Yellamanchili Mandal, Anakapalli District and pass such IA 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 may be pleased to direct the 2nd respondents to consider and dispose the revision petition filed by the petitioners pending disposal of the writ petition and pass such Counsel for the Petitioner(S): 1. MAHADEVA KANTHRIGALA Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. GP FOR REVENUE THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE TARLADA RAJASEKHAR RAO WRIT PETITION No.25382 of 2025 ORDER:- The present Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking the following relief: “…issue a writ of Mandamus or any other appropriate writ to declaring the action of the 2nd respondent in not disposing the revision petition filed by the petitioners u/s. 9 of AP Rights in Land and Pattadar Pass Books Act, 1971 is illegal, improper, unjust, arbitrary and violative of the principles of natural justice and further direct the respondents not to disturb the petitioners possession and enjoyment of the land in S.No. 502/4 of Yellamanchili Village, Yellamanchili Mandal, Anakapalli District and pass…” 2. The above writ petition is filed challenging the action respondent No.2 in not disposing of the revision petition filed by the petitioners under Section 9 of Andhra Pradesh Rights in Land and Pattadar Pass Books Act, 1971 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’). 3. Learned counsel for the petitioners would submit that subsequent to filing of the present writ petition, the petitioner received a notice from the Revisional Authority to attend for hearing. 4. Recording the submission of learned counsel for the petitioner, without touching the merits of the matter, the Writ Petition is disposed of, directing the Revisional Authority to dispose of the appeal filed by the petitioners, as expeditiously as possible. There shall be no order as to costs. As a sequel thereto, miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shall stand closed. ___________________________________ JUSTICE TARLADA RAJASEKHAR RAO Date: 18.09.2025 TVN 51 THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE TARLADA RAJASEKHAR RAO WRIT PETITION No.25382 OF 2025 Date: 18.09.2025 TVN