APHC010603042025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3208] MONDAY,THE FIRST DAY OF DECEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE D RAMESH WRIT PETITION NO: 31972/2025 Between: 1. JONNALAGADDA SARASWATHI, W/O VENKATA RAO AGED 57 YEARS, OCC HOUSEWIFE, R/O D.NO. 1-98, NADIMPALEM VILLAGE, PRATHIPADU MANDAL, GUNTUR DISTRICT. ...PETITIONER AND 1. THE STATE OF AP, REP.BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, PANCHAYAT RAJ AND RURAL DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT, VELAGAPUDI, AMARAVATI, GUNTUR DISTRICT 2. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, GUNTUR DISTRICT AT GUNTUR. 3. THE JOINT COLLECTOR, GUNTUR DISTRICT AT GUNTUR. 4. THE REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER, NARSARAOPETA, GUNTUR DISTRICT. 5. THE TAHSILDHAR, EDIAPADU MANDAL, GUNTUR DISTRICT. 6. SIDDELA LAKSHMI, W/O. RAMA RAO, R/O. NADIMPALEM VILLAGE, PRATHIPADU MANDAL GUNTUR DISTRICT 7. KOTHAPALLI MURAHARI RAO, S/O. SURAIAH, OCC EX- SERVICEMAN, R/O. D.NO. 1/1, S.V.N. COLONY, GUNTUR TOWN, GUNTUR DISTRICT. ...RESPONDENT(S): DR,J W.P No.31972 of 2025 2 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 toPleased to issue a writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of WRIT OF MANDAMUS declaring the action of the 1st respondent in not deciding the Revision Petition dated 26.08.2025 filed under the Board of Revenue Standing Orders 15(18), questioning the proceedings passed in R.Dis.No.1115 2016-E5, dated 06.12.2018, on the file of the 3rd respondent, as illegal, irregular, unjust, amounts to non-discharge of legal obligation conferred on him her under such statute and offends Articles 14, 21 and 300-A of Constitution of India and consequently direct the 1st respondent to decide petitioners said revision petition in accordance with law and pass 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 Pleased to direct the 1st respondent to decide petitioners revision petition dt. 26.08.2025 filed against order dt. 26.08.2025 filed against order dt. 06.12.2018 in R.Dis.No. 1115/2016-E5 passed by the 3rd respondent, pending disposal of the main Writ Petition and pass 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 pleased to amend the cause title of Writ Petition by substituting “The State of Andhra Pradesh, Rep.by its Principal Secretary, Revenue Department, Secretariat, Velagapudi, Amaravati, Guntur District” for the existing 1®' respondent instead of “The State of Andhra Pradesh, Rep.by its Principal Secretary, Panchayat Raj and Rural Development Department, Secretariat, Velagapudi, Amaravati, Guntur District.” in the Writ Petition and affidavit filed in support thereof in the interest of justice and pass Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. PASALAPUDI SATYA HARITHA Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. GP FOR PANCHAYAT RAJ RURAL DEV 2. GP FOR REVENUE DR,J W.P No.31972 of 2025 3 The Court made the following Order: This writ petition is filed seeking the following relief:- “…to issue a writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of WRIT OF MANDAMUS declaring the action of the 1st respondent in not deciding the Revision Petition dated 26.08.2025 filed under the Board of Revenue Standing Orders 15(18), questioning the proceedings passed in R.Dis.No.1115 2016-E5, dated 06.12.2018, on the file of the 3rd respondent, as illegal, irregular, unjust, amounts to non-discharge of legal obligation conferred on him/her under such statute and offends Articles 14, 21 and 300-A of Constitution of India and consequently direct the 1st respondent to decide petitioners said revision petition in accordance with law and pass such other order or orders...” 2. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner as well as the learned Government Pleader representing the official respondents. 3. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that initially, the petitioner and respondent No.6 were granted D.K. pattas in 2005 for extents of Ac.0.95 in Sy.No.396/7-1B and Ac.1.00 in Sy.No.396/7-1C of Kondaveedu Village, and Pattadar Passbooks and Title Deeds (Nos.1759 and 1760) were issued to them. Later filed an appeal before respondent No.4 alleging that respondent No.7 had illegally secured a passbook by changing the Adangal entries in the computer with the help of the Village Revenue Officer, and had fenced the land, preventing their access. 4. Though the respondent No.4 found that pattas were originally granted to the petitioner and respondent No.6, the respondent No.5 cancelled their pattas alleging violation of patta conditions and re-assigned the lands to respondent No.7. On revision after detailed consideration, the respondent No.4 passed orders in Appeal Case No.48/14 vide Rc.No.5210/14-A dated 09.03.2016, cancelling the entries recorded in the passbook and title deed bearing Khata No.1759 granted to the respondent No.7. Aggrieved thereby, respondent No.7 filed Revision Petition before the respondent No.3. DR,J W.P No.31972 of 2025 4 5. The learned counsel further contents that in the Revision Petition filed by the respondent No.7, respondent No.3 set aside order of the respondent No.4 dated 09.03.2016, holding that the petitioner and respondent No.6 had violated patta conditions and restored the assignment in favour of respondent No.7. The petitioner preferred a Revision Petition before the respondent No.1 under the Board of Revenue Standing Orders 15(18) calling for the entire records connected to the proceedings passed in R.Dis No.1115/2016-E5 dated 06.12.2018 on the file of the respondent No.3, examine the same and set aside the said order. As the respondent No.1 is not deciding the said revision petition, the present writ petition is filed. 6. On the other hand, the learned Government Pleader, on written instructions dated 30.11.2025 received from the Special Chief Secretary to Government, Revenue Department, submits that the report from the District Collector, Palnadu is received on 28.11.2025 on the revision petition filed by the petitioner and it will be disposed of, within a period of three (03) months, after conducting proper enquiry in the matter. 7. Considering the submissions made and on perusal of the record, this Court, without going into the merits of the case, deems it appropriate to dispose of the writ petition, directing the respondent No.1 to pass appropriate orders on the Revision Petition filed by the petitioner, within a period of four (04) months from the date of receipt of copy of this order. No costs. Miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shall stand closed. _______________________ JUSTICE D RAMESH Date:01.12.2025 Ksj