APHC010533042025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3330] WEDNESDAY, THE EIGHTH DAY OF OCTOBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE TARLADA RAJASEKHAR RAO WRIT PETITION No. 27541 of 2025 Between: 1. SRI DEVARA SURI APPA RAO,, S/O LATE DEVARA APPA RAO, AGED 38 YEARS, D.NO.8-148, 0PP. GVMC, MADHURAWADA, VISAKHAPATNAM. 2. SRI DEVARA TRINADH,, S/O. LATE DEVARA APPA RAO, AGED 34 YEARS, D.NO.8-148, 0PP. GVMC, MADHURAWADA, VISAKHAPATNAM 3. SRI DEVARA SURESH,, S/O. LATE RAMBABU, AGED 31 YEARS, D.NO.9-26, SRIVALLI NAGAR, 0PP. ELECTRICAL OFFICE, MADHURAWADA, VISAKHAPATNAM 4. SRI DEVARA RAMESH,, S/O LATE RAMBABU, AGED 29 YEARS, D.NO.9-26, SRIVALLI NAGAR, 0PP. ELECTRICAL OFFICE, MADHURAWADA, VISAKHAPATNAM. 5. SRI DEVARA APPALA NARASAMMA,, S/O. LATE RAMBABU, AGED 38 YEARS, D.NO.9-26, SRIVALLI NAGAR, 0PP. ELECTRICAL OFFICE, MADHURAWADA, VISAKHAPATNAM. 6. SRI GODAVARTHI RAMAKRISHNA RAO, S/O LATE VENKANNA, AGED ABOUT 65 YEARS, OCC BUSINESS, R/O D.NO.14-10-2/7, B.C. ROAD, OPP TNR KALAYANA MANDAPAM, GAJUWAKA, VISAKHAPATNAM. (PETITIONER NO.6 IS THE GPA HOLDER OF PETITIONER NOS.1 TO 5 ...PETITIONER(S) AND 1. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE, VELAGAPUDI, AMARAVATI, GUNTUR DISTRICT. 2. THE DIRECTOR OF SETTLEMENTS, SURVEY AND LAND RECORDS ANDHRA PRADESH, VIJAYAWADA. 3. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, , VISAKHAPATNAM DISTRICT, 2 VISAKHAPATNAM 4. THE JOINT COLLECTOR CUM SETTLEMENT OFFICER, VISAKHAPATNAM. 5. THE TAHSILDAR, VISAKHAPATNAM (RURAL) MANDAL VISAKHAPATNAM 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 to issue a Writ of Mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction, declaring the action of the Respondents more particularly, the Respondent No.2 in not providing sufficient and proper opportunity of hearing and reserving the Revision Petition No.5 of 2024 on the file of the Respondent No.2- Director of Settlements, Andhra Pradesh for judgment on 26.09.2025 as being illegal, arbitrary, violative of principles of natural justice and in violation of Articles 14, 21 and 300-A of Constitution of India and Consequently direct the Respondent No.2 to reopen and rehear the Revision Petition No.5 of 2024 on merits by providing sufficient opportunity of hearing to the Petitioners. Counsel for the Petitioner(S): 1. N ASHWANI KUMAR Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. GP FOR REVENUE The Court made the following: 3 ORDER: The present Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking the following relief: “…to issue a Writ of Mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction, declaring the action of the Respondents more particularly, the Respondent No.2 in not providing sufficient and proper opportunity of hearing and reserving the Revision Petition No.5 of 2024 on the file of the Respondent No.2-Director of Settlements, Andhra Pradesh for judgment on 26.09.2025 as being illegal, arbitrary, violative of principles of natural justice and in violation of Articles 14, 21 and 300-A of Constitution of India and Consequently direct the Respondent No.2 to reopen and rehear the Revision Petition No.5 of 2024 on merits by providing sufficient opportunity of hearing to the Petitioners and pass such other orders…” 2. Succinctly, the Writ Petition is filed with a request to provide an opportunity for a hearing in Revision Petition Nos.5 of 2024 and 4 of 2024, which are pending before the 2nd respondent, on the grounds that the counsel representing the petitioners was unable to present arguments due to illness. Meanwhile, the 2nd respondent has reserved the case for the pronouncement of orders. Not providing an opportunity for a hearing before reserving the case is viewed as a violation of the principles of natural justice. Therefore, the petitioners seek a direction to the respondent-authorities to provide an opportunity for a hearing prior to delivering the orders. 3. Sri K.M.Krishna Reddy, learned Government Pleader for Revenue, submitted a copy of the attendance of cases scheduled for hearing on 22.09.2025. It indicates that the writ petitioners are 4 purposefully delaying to make their submissions in order to prolong the proceedings, and therefore, the authorities have rightly reserved their orders. 4. Without going into the merits of the case, and as the relief claimed is only for an opportunity of hearing, this Court is inclined to accede to the request of the petitioners and directs the 2nd respondent to allow the writ petitioners herein to advance their arguments. However, this is subject to the condition that the petitioners shall not seek any further adjournments, and they shall present their arguments on 10.10.2025 and 17.10.2025, and shall cooperate in the disposal of Revision Petition Nos.5 of 2024 and 4 of 2024. If the petitioners fail to advance their arguments as stipulated by this Court, the respondent- authorities are at liberty to proceed with the revisions and pass appropriate orders in accordance with law. 5. With the above direction, the Writ Petition is disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs. As a sequel thereto, Interlocutory Applications pending, if any, shall stand closed. __________________________________ JUSTICE TARLADA RAJASEKHAR RAO Date: 07.10.2025 siva 5 THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE TARLADA RAJASEKHAR RAO WRIT PETITION No.27541 of 2025 Date: 07.10.2025 siva