APHC010199612025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3529] MONDAY, THE FIRST DAY OF DECEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE R RAGHUNANDAN RAO THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE T.C.D.SEKHAR I.A.Nos.2, 3, 5 & 6 of 2025 IN/AND WRIT APPEAL NO: 605/2025 Writ Appeal under clause 15 of the Letters Patent be pleased to order for an enquiry into the matter and also direct the Tahsildar, Joint Collector and Collector to delete the names of the Respondent No. 1 and to declare that the said land is not an Anaadheenam land and restore the name of the appellant in the revenue records / E.C. records and direct the National Highways Authorities as also Airport Authorities to grant compensation to the appellant or to set aside the order of the learned Single Judge and direct the learned Single Judge to implead the appellant as one of the Respondents and then to pass order, and pass such Between: 1. SRI LALITHA FOUNDATIONS (INDIA) PVT LTD, OLD NO. 29, NEW NO. 22, NATESAN STREET, T.NAGAR, CHENNAI-600017, TAMIL NADU REP. BY ITS DIRECTOR, SRI. N. RAJESH, S/O.NARASIMAM AGED ABOUTSSYEARS. ...APPELLANT AND 1. PADI JAYASHANKAR REDDY, S/O LATE KRISHNA REDDY, R/O D.NO. 3-89, NETHAJI ROAD, TIRUCHANURU, RENIGUNTA 2 MANDAL, DISTRICT --TIRUPATHI, ANDHRA PRADESH - 2. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REPRESENTED BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE, SECRETARIAT BUILDING, VELAGAPUDI, DISTRICT - GUNTUR, ANDHRA PRADESH - 3. THE COLLECTOR, TIRUPATHI DISTRICT, (ERSTWHILE CHITTOOR DISTRICT) ANDHRA PRADESH 4. THE TAHSILDAR, RENIGUNTA MANDAL DISTRICT - SRI SATYA SAI (ERSTWHILE CHITTOOR), ANDHRA PRADESH - ...RESPONDENT(S): 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 dispense with in filing of the certified copy / document of the order passed in W.P. No. 2277/2024 else the Appellant would be put to severe loss and hardship IA NO: 2 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 grant leave to the appellant to file the writ affidavit taking into consideration the contentions put forth by the appellant else the appellant would be put to serious loss and hardship. IA NO: 3 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 condone the delay of 367 days in filing the Writ Appeal and pass such IA NO: 4 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 3 petitioner prays this Hon’ble Court to grant Status Quo pending disposal of the Writ Appeal and pass such IA NO: 5 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 to grant leave to implead the Petitioner in W.A. No. 605 of 2025 as second Appellant pass IA NO: 6 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 to implead the Second Appellant in W.A. No. 605 of 2025 pass Counsel for the Appellant: 1. M V J K KUMAR Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. GP FOR REVENUE 2. 4 The Court made the following Judgment: (Per Hon’ble Sri Justice R Raghunandan Rao) The 1st respondent in this writ appeal had approached this Court, by way of W.P.No.2277 of 2024. In this writ petition, the writ petitioner contended that his father had been assigned an extent of Ac.2-74 cents of land in Sy.No.104/1A and an extent of Ac.1-33 cents of land in Sy.No.103/6 of Kothapalem Village, Renigunta Mandal of Tirupati District, in the year 1993 by way of a D-form patta. 2. The complaint of the 1st respondent in the writ petition was that though he was entitled to alienate the land by virtue of G.O.Ms.No.596, dated 19.12.2023, the official respondents were not according such permission despite his application. The 1st respondent herein also expressed an apprehension that he would be dispossessed from the said land by the official respondents. 3. A learned Single Judge of this Court, by an order, dated 08.02.2024, had disposed of the writ petition with a direction to the official respondents to consider the request of the 1st respondent herein, in terms of G.O.Ms.No.596, dated 19.12.2023, within a period of six (6) weeks from the date of receipt of the order, with a further direction that the respondent authorities should not interfere with the possession of the 1st respondent herein over the said land. 5 4. The 1st appellant herein approached this Court, by way of the present appeal, seeking leave of this Court as the appellant was not a party to the writ petition. 5. The 1st appellant seeks leave, to file the present appeal, on the ground that the appellant, is the owner of the said land and that the 1st respondent, under the guise of the orders of this Court, is seeking to dispossess the appellant from the said land and obtained entries in the revenue records which would be detrimental to the 1st appellant. I.A.No.2 of 2025 has been filed seeking leave of this Court for permitting the 1st appellant to move the present appeal. I.A.No.3 of 2025 was filed seeking condonation of delay of 367 days on the ground that the 1st appellant was not a party to the writ petition and became aware of the orders of this Court only when the revenue authorities had come on to the land. I.A.No.5 of 2025 has been filed seeking leave of this Court to file a petition to implead the proposed petitioner as the 2nd appellant. I.A.No.5 of 2025 has been filed seeking leave of this Court to file an application to implead the proposed petitioner as the 2nd appellant. I.A.No.6 of 2025 has been filed by the proposed petitioner to implead her as the 2nd appellant to the writ appeal on the ground that she is a necessary party to the appeal. 6. This court had directed notice to the 1st respondent. As the normal method of notice by registered post was not effective, this Court had permitted 6 the 1st appellant, by an order, dated 29.07.2025 to publish notice of this writ appeal, in the Chittoor District Edition of Eenadu newspaper. Learned counsel for the 1st appellant filed proof of service vide USR No.75684 of 2025, on 21.07.2025. Despite service of notice, the 1st respondent has not chosen to appear before this Court. 7. In the circumstances, adequate reasons are made out for condonation of delay, for grant of leave of this Court and impleadment of the proposed petitioner as 2nd appellant. Accordingly, these four applications are allowed. 8. The 1st appellant contends that the 1st appellant is the owner of the said land by virtue of deeds of sale starting from the year 1917. It is further contended that the land in question is a private patta land and could not have been treated as a Government land or Anaadheenam land which could be assigned to any person. In the circumstances, the 1st appellant contends that the direction of the learned Single Judge would adversely affect the interests of the appellant. 9. The question of the nature of land and whether the deeds of sale submitted by the 1st appellant would cover the land in question etcetra are question of facts which would have to be resolved by the Tahsildar. 10. In the circumstances, this Writ Appeal is disposed of modifying the order of the learned Single Judge to the extent of directing the Tahsildar to 7 permit the 1st appellant to submit its objections to the Tahsildar, within a period of three (3) weeks from the date of receipt of this order. Thereafter, the Tahsidlar shall consider the objections raised by the 1st appellant by giving due opportunity of hearing to the 1st appellant as well as the 1st respondent. Necessary orders to be passed after considering the objections, if any, moved by from either side. In the meanwhile, status-quo shall be maintained. There shall be no order as to costs. As a sequel, pending miscellaneous applications, if any, shall stand closed. ________________________ R. RAGHUNANDAN RAO, J ________________ T.C.D. SEKHAR, J Date: 01.12.2025 KA 8 THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE R RAGHUNANDAN RAO THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE T.C.D.SEKHAR I.A.Nos.2 & 3 of 2025 IN/AND WRIT APPEAL NO: 605/2025 Date: 01.12.2025 KA 9