IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH :: AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) MONDAY, THE THIRD DAY OF FEBRUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE RAVI CHEEMALAPATl WRIT PETITION NO: 2943 OF 2021 Between: Matta Siva Reddy, S/o. Yella Reddy, Aged about 80 years, Occ: Agriculture, R/o. D.No.1/39, Lingampally Village, Siddavatam Mandal, YSR Kadapa District. ...PETITIONER AND 1. The State of Andhra Pradesh, Rep. by its Principal Secretary, Revenue Department, Secretariate, Velagapudi, Amaravathi. 2. The District Collector, YSR Kadapa District. 3. The Sub-Collector, Rajampet, YSR Kadapa District. 4. The Tahsildar, Siddavatam Mandal, YSR Kadapa District. 5. Jada Kondaiah, S/o. Jada Kondaiah, Aged about 58 years, Occ: Post Man, R/o.Harijanawada, Kadapaipally Village, Siddavatam Mandal, YSR Kadapa District. 6. Jada Muneeswar, S/o. Late. Jada Munaiah, Aged about 25 years, Occ: Nil, R/o.Harijanawada, Kadapaipally Village, Siddavatam Mandal, YSR Kadapa District. 7. Jada Nithya Poojaiah, S/o. Late. Jada Munaiah, Aged about 35 years, Occ:- Nil, R/o.Harijanawada, Kadapaipally Village, Siddavatam Mandal, YSR Kadapa District. ...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 that the action of the respondent - -- No. 4 in preparing / updating the Record of Rights pertaining to the land to ' the extent of Ac.1-28 cents in Sy.No.99/2 situate in Lingampally Village, without holding any enquiry and issuing two 1-B Certificates for (a) 64 cents out of the said Ac.1-28 cents in favour of Late. Jada Kondaiah father of the unofficial respondent No.5 by making entry in Column No. 5 of the Certificate of the Survey number of the said extent of 64 cents as 99/3, and (b) 1-B Certificate for the remaining extent of 64 cents in the Sy.No.99/2 in favour of Late. Jada Munaiah, father of the unofficial respondents 6 & 7, as arbitrary, malafide, capricious and illegal and violative of the procedure prescribed under the Andhra Pradesh Rights in Land and Pattedar Passbooks Act, 1971 and the Andhra Pradesh Rights in Land and Pattedar Passbook Rules, 1989 and the equality clause under Article 14 of the Constitution of India and consequently set aside the two 1-B certificates and direct the unofficial respondents 5 to 7 not to interfere with the possession and enjoyment of the petitioner of his land of Ac.1- 28 cents in Sy.No.99/2 of Lingampally Village, Siddavatam Mandal, YSR Kadapa Districtand. lA NO: 1 OF 2022 Between: 1. Jada Kondaiah, S/o. Jada Kondaiah, Aged about 58 years, Occ: Post Man, R/o.Harijanawada, Kadapaipally Village, Siddavatam Mandal, YSR Kadapa District. 2. Jada Muneeswar, S/o. Late. Jada Munaiah, Aged about 25 years, Occ: Nil, R/o.Harijanawada, Kadapaipally Village, Siddavatam Mandal, YSR Kadapa District. 3. Jada Nithya Poojaiah, S/o. Late. Jada Munaiah, Aged about 35 years, Occ:- Nil, R/o.Harijanawada, Kadapaipally Village, Siddavatam Mandal, YSR Kadapa District. ...PETITIONERS N0.5 to 7/RESPONDENTS f AND 1. Matta Siva Reddy, S/o. Yella Reddy, Aged about 80 years, Occ: Agriculture, R/o. D.No.1/39, Lingampally Village, Siddavatam Mandal, YSR Kadapa District. ...RESPONDENTS/PETITIONER The State of Andhra Pradesh, Rep. by its Principal Secretary, Revenue Department, Secretariate, Velagapudi, Amaravathi. 3. The District Collector, YSR Kadapa District. 4. The Sub-Collector, Rajampet, YSR Kadapa District. 5. The Tahsildar, Siddavatam Mandal, YSR Kadapa District. ...RESPONDENTS/RESPONDENTS 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 vacate the Interim order, dated, 10.02.2021 made in WP.No.2943 of 2021. lA NO: 1 OF 2021 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 respondents 5 to 7, not to interfere with the possession and enjoyment of the petitioner of his land of Ac.1-28 cents in Sy.No.99/2 of Lingampally Village, Siddavatam Mandal, YSR Kadapa District. Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI S.MADHAVA RAO Counsel for the Respondent Nos.1 to 4: GP FOR REVENUE Counsel for the Respondent No.5: SRI V.R.REDDY KOWURI Counsel for the Respondent Nos.6 & 7:None The Court made the following: ORDER 2. mj '.W(p.J{o.2943 of2021 1 APHC010042812021 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3332] MONDAY ,THE THIRD DAY OF FEBRUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE RAVI CHEEMALAPATI WRIT PETITION NO: 2943/2021 Between: Matta Siva Reddy ...PETITIONER AND The State Of Andhra Pradesh and Others ...RESPONDENT(S) Counsel for the Petitioner: 1.SUREPALLI MADHAVA RAO Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1.GP FOR REVENUE 2.VR REDDY KOWURI The Court made the following: ORDER The grievance of the petitioner is that respondent no.4 prepared/ updated the Record of Rights pertaining to the land to the extent of Ac. 1-28 cents in Survey No.99/2 situated in Lingampally village, without holding any f ‘RCJ \ '.W(p.y{o.2943 of2021 2 enquiry and issued two 1-B certificates for Ac.0-64 cents out of the said Ac. 1-28 cents in favour of late Jada Kondaiah, father of respondent no.5 by making entry in Cloumn No.5 of the certificate of the survey number of the said extent of Ac.0-64 cents as 99/3 and 1-B certificate for the remaining extent of Ac.0-64 cents in Survey No.99/2 in favour of late Jada Munaiah, father of respondent nos.6 8i 7. 2. Heard Sri S.Madhava Rao, learned counsel for petitioner, Sri V.R.Reddy Kowuri, learned counsel for respondent no.5, and Sri Krishna Praneeth, learned Assistant Government Pleader for revenue. 3. Sri S.Madhava Rao, learned counsel, while reiterating the contents of the writ affidavit, would submit that grandfather of the petitioner viz., Matta Pedda Venkata Subbaiah was the owner and possessor of the subject property and his name was entered in resurvey and resettlement register of Lingampally village. After his death, his son Yellareddy inherited the property and he was raising Horse gram and vegetable crops in the said land and after his lifetime the petitioner being son succeeded the property and he has been in possession and enjoyment of the said land. The learned counsel would further submit that a few days prior to filing of the writ petition, the respondent no.5 came to the subject property and claimed that government <RCJ .W(P.y^o.2943 of2021 3 had given DKT patta in his favour for the subject land and when he made enquiries, it came to light that Kondaiah, father of respondent no.5, and Munaiah, father or respondent nos. 6 & 7 worked as village servants and they managed the revenue officials to show the subject land as government land and also incorporate their names in revenue records as if DKT patta had been issued to them. In fact, the subject land is a private patta land and the same has been in possession and enjoyment of family of petitioner since several decades. The revenue authorities did not follow the procedure before affecting modifications in the revenue records such as issuing notice. Therefore, the action of respondent no.4 is illegal, arbitrary and accordingly prayed to allow the writ petition. 4. On the other hand, the learned Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue while reiterating the contents of the counter-affidavit would contend that DKT pattas were issued in the year 1994 names of unofficial respondents were mutated in revenue records in the year 2012 and at this length of time the petitioner cannot question such mutation. Even otherwise if at all the petitioner has any grievance he has to file revision under Section 9 of the AP ROR Act, 1971 before the Joint Collector and further no material is placed on record to show that petitioner is grandson of Matta Peda Venkata Subbaiah i '.W(PMo.2943 of2021 and the disputed questions as to whether the petitioner is owner of the property or not cannot be adjudicated by this Court while exercising jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution. There are no merits in the writ petition and the same deserves dismissal, the writ petition. Accordingly, prayed to dismiss 5. Perused the material available submissions made by learned counsel for the parties. on record and considered the 6. The petitioner relied on copies of Re-Survey and Re-settlement Register and also the Encumbrance Certificate along with copy of Register of Holding in support of his case. This Court while exercising jurisdiction under Article 226 of Constitution cannot go into the dispute questions the petitioner is owner of the subject property and as to whether he is related to the person whose name found place in the revenue records as to whether prior to amending the revenue records. As rightly contended by learned Assistant Government Pleader, as the petitioner has an efficacious alternate remedy of challenging the action of the authorities in amending the entries in the revenue records, this writ petition is not maintainable. Further, according to the revenue authorities, the subject land was assigned in the year 1994 and the assignees have been in possession and enjoyment of the same. '.W(p.‘Ko.Z943 of2021 5 Therefore, there is dispute regarding title and also possession of the subject property, which cannot be resolved in a writ petition. Hence, this writ petition is not maintainable and meritless. 7. In the above view of the matter, this writ petition is disposed of and the petitioner, if he desires, can get his grievance redressed before appropriate forum. There shall be no order as to costs. Pending miscellaneous petitions, if any, shall stand closed. Sd/- K. TATA RAO DEPUTY REGISTRAR //TRUE COPY// SEC‘rpKl^FICER To. 1. The Principal Secretary, Revenue Department, State of Andhra Pradesh Secretariate, Velagapudi, Amaravathi, Guntur District. 2. The District Collector, YSR Kadapa District. 3. The Sub-Collector, Rajampet, YSR Kadapa District. 4. The Tahsildar, Siddavatam Mandal, YSR Kadapa District. 5. Jada Muneeswar, S/o. Late. Jada Munaiah, Aged about 25 Nil, R/o.Harijanawada, Kadapaipally Village, Siddavatam Mandal Kadapa District. 6. Jada Nithya Poojaiah, S/o. Late. Jada Munaiah, Aged about 35 Occ:Nil, R/o.Harijanawada, Kadapaipally Village, Siddavatam Mandal, YSR Kadapa District. 7. One CC to Sri S.Madhava Rao, Advocate [OPUC] 8. TwoCCsto GP for Revenue, High Court of Andhra Pradesh. 9. One CC to Sri V.R.Reddy Kovvuri, Advocate. [OPUC] Three CD Copies. years, Occ: , YSR years. [OUT] 10. gi f HIGH COURT DATED:03/02/2025 ORDER WP.No.2943 of 2021 OF 10 MAR 2025 mr C9 Current Section ATCV^^^ .-■p DISPOSING OF THE WRIT PETITION WITHOUT COSTS