APHC010622402025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3529] SATURDAY, THE TWENTY SECOND DAY OF NOVEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE R RAGHUNANDAN RAO THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE T.C.D.SEKHAR WRIT APPEAL NO: 1218/2025 Writ Appeal under clause 15 of the Letters Patent above named Appellant begs to present this Memorandum of Writ Appeal against the order passed in W.P.No.27144 Of 2025, dated 14-10-2025 passed by His Lordship Sri. Justice Tarlada Rajasekhar Rao for the following grounds among other Between: 1. BUDDASETTY VENKATA KRISHNAIAH, AGED 54 YEARS, S/O. BUDDASETTY NARASIMHULU, H.NO.5-22,ALAMUR VILLAGE. RUDRAVARAM MANDAL, NANDYAL DISTRICT ...APPELLANT AND 1. P THEJOMAYE, AGED ABOUT 58 YEARS W/O. LATE P.PRASAD, D.NO. 1-3-16, RAMADASU STREET, ALLAGADDA, NANDYAL DISTRICT. 2. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE, A.P SECRETARIAT, VELAGAPUDI, AMARAVATHI GUNTUR DISTRICT, ANDHRA PRADESH. 3. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, NANDYAL DISTRICT, ANDHRA PRADESH. 4. THE REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER, NANDYAL REVENUE DIVISION, NANDYAL, ANDHRA PRADESH. 2 RRR,J & TCDS,J W.A.No.1218 of 2025 5. THE TAHSILDAR, RUDRAVARAM MANDAL NANDYAL DISTRICT. 6. THE MANDAL SURVEYOR, RUDRAVARAM MANDAL, NANDYAL DISTRICT. ...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 Pleased to dispense with certified copy of the Order dated 14.10.2025 in WP.No.27144 of 2025 on the file of Hon’ble High Court of Andhra Pradesh 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 grant leave to the Appellant/3^^ Party to file the Writ Appeal before this Hon’ble High Court, who are not shown as parties in WP.No.27144 of 2025 and obtained Final order dated 14.10.2025, thereby the appellant are filing the present Writ Appeal and leave may be granted for filing the Writ Appeal, since the appellants are highly effected party, and their legitimate rights are being highly effected in the interest of justice and pass 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 Pleased to Permit the Appellant/Petitioner to file Ex.P7 to Ex.P12 as additional documents in the above Writ Appeal, which are necessary for adjudication of the appeal and were not filed by the (Respondent No.1 herein) in WP.No.27144 of 2025 dated 14.10.2025 on the file of the Honble High Court of Andhra Pradesh, Amaravati and Pass 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 Pleased to suspend the final order in WP.No.27144 of 2025 dated 14.10.2025 on the file of the Hon ble High Court of AP, Amaravathi and pass 3 RRR,J & TCDS,J W.A.No.1218 of 2025 Counsel for the Appellant: 1. THATHIREDDY ASHOK SRIVASTAVA Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. GP FOR REVENUE 2. MOHANNAIR RAJEEV KUMAR 4 RRR,J & TCDS,J W.A.No.1218 of 2025 The Court made the following Judgment: (per Hon’ble Sri Justice R. Raghunandan Rao) The 1st respondent herein, had approached this Court, by way of W.P.No.27144 of 2025, claiming that, he is the owner and possessor of Ac.0.15 cents of land, in Sy.No.367 of Alamur Village, Rudravaram Mandal, Nandyal District and that the respondents were not conducting a survey and demarcation of the said land, despite necessary applications being made. 2. A learned Single Judge of this Court, by an Order, dated 14.10.2025, had disposed of the Writ Petition, with a direction to the Authorities to conduct necessary surveys, on the basis of the application of the petitioner, dated 21.07.2025, after issuing a notice to all the concerned interested persons. 3. It appears that, the learned counsel appearing for the 1st respondent, in the course of his submissions, before the Court, had also raised concerns about safety and possibility of a physical fight, in completing the survey due to the obstructions of the Villagers, who are actively preventing the survey process. The learned counsel had also sought police protection for facilitation of the said survey, though, no such prayer has been made, in the Writ Petition. A learned Single Judge, after considering the said submissions, had also permitted the petitioner to submit an application, before the concerned police seeking protection and for the police to do the needful, in the event of such an application being submitted. 5 RRR,J & TCDS,J W.A.No.1218 of 2025 4. Aggrieved by this Order, the appellant herein, has filed the present Writ Appeal, along with an interlocutory application seeking leave. The said leave has been sought by the appellant, by way of I.A.No.2 of 2025, on the ground that, he has a claim over the very same land and that, any survey conducted by the Authorities and any demarcation of land, by such Authorities would affect his interest. In such circumstances, I.A.No.2 of 2025, is allowed. 5. The case of the appellant is that, he is the owner of land to an extent of Ac.1.55 cents, in Sy.No.367 of Alamur Village, Rudravaram Mandal, Nandyal District and that, the land being claimed by the 1st respondent, falls within this extent of land. He would further submit that, the 1st respondent, by suppressing the claim of the appellant, had approached this Court, with unclean hands and had obtained Orders from this Court. 6. The learned counsel appearing for the 1st respondent, would submit that, there was no suppression of facts in as much as the affidavit, filed in support of the writ petition specifically stated that, there had been resistance to the conduct of the survey. 7. A vague allegation of resistance to the survey, without impleading the person, who is said to have obstructed the said survey, is not sufficient disclosure of facts. Further, it is obvious that, the 1st respondent was aware of the claims being made by the appellant herein. This fact is made clear by the submissions made by the learned counsel for the 1st respondent, across the Bar, before the learned Single Judge, that there was a possibility of a physical 6 RRR,J & TCDS,J W.A.No.1218 of 2025 affray, on account of the resistance that would be offered by the villagers for such a survey. 8. In these circumstances, we are of the opinion that, there has been suppression of fact by the 1st respondent, while approaching this Court, by way of the above Writ Petition and it is settled law that, this Court would not assist any person, who approaches this Court with unclean hands or by suppressing facts. 9. Accordingly, this Writ Appeal is allowed. 10. However, it would not preclude the 1st respondent or the appellant to assert their rights in any other manner. 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:22.11.2025 KPV 7 RRR,J & TCDS,J W.A.No.1218 of 2025 133 THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE R. RAGHUNANDAN RAO AND THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE T.C.D.SEKHAR WRIT APPEAL No.1218 of 2025 (per Hon’ble Sri Justice R. Raghunandan Rao) 22.11.2025 KPV