1 APHC010619242025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3208] SATURDAY,THE TWENTY SECOND DAY OF NOVEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE D RAMESH WRIT PETITION NO: 32395/2025 Between: 1. RAGE RAMACHANDRA, S/O RAGE SWAMY REDDY (LATE), AGED ABOUT 43 YEARS, OCC. AGRICULTURE R/O H.NO. L-24B, BANMUMUKKALA VILLAGE, PAMULAPADU MANDAL, NANDYAL DISTRICT. ...PETITIONER AND 1. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP, BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, REVENUE DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT, VELAGAPUDI, AMARAVATI GUNTUR DISTRICT. 2. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, NANDYAL DISTRICT, NANDYAL. 3. THE TAHSILDAR, PAMULAPADU MANDAL, NANDYAL DISTRICT. ...RESPONDENT(S): Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. V BABY RANI Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. GP FOR REVENUE The Court made the following: 2 ORDER: The present Writ Petition is filed, under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, seeking the following relief: “ It is prayed that this Hon’ble Court may be pleased to issue an appropriate Writ, Order or Direction, more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus, declaring the inaction of the 3rd respondent in mutating the name of the petitioner in the revenue records in respect of the land in Sy.No.340/3, 340/4, 340/5 and 394/1 admeasuring Ac. 1.69 cents, Ac.0.62 cents, Ac.1.26 cents and Ac.2.50 cents situated at Nallakalva village, Pamulapadu Mandalam, Nandyal District, inspite of personal visits followed by PGRS complaint made on 1-9-2025, as being illegal, arbitrary, unjust and unconstitutional and consequently direct the 3rd respondent herein to mutate the name of the petitioner in the revenue records in respect of the above mentioned land and to grant such other relief or reliefs as this Hon'ble Court deems fit and proper in the circumstances of the case.” 2. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Assistant Government Pleader for the respondents. 3. This writ petition is filed to declare the inaction of the 3rd respondent in mutating the name of the petitioner in revenue records in respect of the subject land, in spite of the PGRS complaint made on 01.09.2025. 4. Learned Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue appearing for the respondents, on instructions, has submitted that the application of the petitioner dated 01.09.2025 has been considered by way of an Endorsement dated 19.09.2025. 5. In view of the above facts, this Writ Petition is closed, granting liberty to the petitioner to approach the appropriate authority or forum to challenge the 3 Endorsement dated 19.09.2025, in accordance with law. There shall be no order as to costs. As a sequel thereto, interlocutory applications pending, if any, in the writ petition, shall also stand closed. ___________________ JUSTICE D.RAMESH 22.11.2025 Vns