APHC010346172018 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3209] TUESDAY, THE THIRTIETH DAY OF DECEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE NINALA JAYASURYA WRIT PETITION NO: 15978/2018 Between: 1. MUKKU VENKATA NARAYANAMMA, W/O. PEDA KOTIREDDY ABOUT 62 YEARS, OCC.HOUSEWIFE AND CULTIVATION IMMADICHERUVU VILLAGE, VELIGANDLA MANDAL PRAKASAM DISTRICT. A.P. ...PETITIONER AND 1. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP.BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, REVENUE DEPARTMENT A.P SECRETARIAT, VELAGAPUDI, AMARAVATHI GUNTUR DISTRICT. 2. THE DISTRICT JOINT COLLECTOR, PRAKASAM DISTRICT, ONGOLE. 3. THE REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER, KANDUKUR, PRAKASAM DISTRICT. 4. THE TAHSILDAR, VELIGANDLA MANDAL PRAKASAM DISTRICT. 5. MUKKU JAYARAMI REDDY, S/O. DASAIAH AGED ABOUT 58 OCC.AGRICULTURE IMMADICHERUVU VILLAGE VELIGANDLA MANDAL PRAKASAM 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 toto issue an appropriate Writ Order or orders, Direction or Direction 2 more one in the nature of writ of mandamus declaring the action of the 3rd respondent in treating the petitioners lands as Government land like Grazing Porambokes,Check Dams are involved of the lands Sy. Nos.252 and 253/2 for an extent of Ac.22.37cents, as Khata No. 368 situated in Immadicheruvu village, Veligandla Mandal, Prakasam District on guise of complaint filed by the 5th respondent, Rc.E2/3177/2010 before the Honourable Lokayukta as illegal, arbitrary and contrary to the rules laid down in AP Rights in Land and Pattadar Pass books Act, for the following reasons of the case and violation of Article 14, 19 and 21 of Constitution of India and consequently direct the respondents not to cancel the pattadar pass books of the petitioners lands and pass IA NO: 1 OF 2018 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 direct the respondents not to cancel the pattadar pass books of the petitioners lands existed in Sy. Nos. 252 and 253/2 for an extent of Ac. 22.37 cents, as Khata No. 368 situated in Immadicheruvu village, Veligandla Mandal, Prakasam District and pass Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. VENKATESWARLU GADA Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. GP FOR REVENUE (AP) 2. TENEPALLI NIRANJAN 3 The Court made the following ORDER: Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard the learned Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue appearing on behalf of the respondent Nos.1 to 4. 2. The present writ petition is filed seeking to declare ‘in action’ of the respondent No.3 in treating the petitioner’s lands as government lands like grazing porambokes, check dams etc., under the guise of a complaint lodged by 5th respondent before the Hon’ble Lokayukta as illegal, arbitrary and contrary to A.P. Rights in Land and Pattadar Pass Books Act and for consequential directions. 3. The learned counsel for the petitioner, while referring to the averments made in the affidavit filed in support of the writ petition, inter alia submits that the subject matter of lands to an extent of Ac.22.37 cents in survey Nos.252 and 253/2 of Immadicheruvu village, Veligandla Mandal, Prakasam District are the ancestral properties of the petitioner and the 5th respondent. He submits that the 5th respondent is a highly influential person and in collusion with the official respondents, filed a complaint before the Hon’ble Lokayukta with a view to harass the petitioner and under the influence of the 5th respondent, the respondent No.3 is initiating action to treat the subject matter lands as government lands and under the said circumstances, the petitioner filed the present Writ Petition. 4 4. The learned counsel for the petitioner also drawn the attention of this Court to the show cause notice dated .11.2013 issued by the Joint Collector, calling upon the petitioner to show cause as to why the pattadar pass books and title deeds obtained fraudulently by misrepresentation of the facts should not be cancelled. However, the learned counsel has not been able to state anything as to why there is a delay in filing of the Writ Petition in the year 2018 when the show cause notice was issued in the year 2013, much less, the subsequent developments after issuance of the show cause notice. In the affidavit filed in support of the Writ Petition, in fact, there are no averments with reference to the said show cause notice issued in the year 2013 or submission of any explanation with reference to the same. Though no counter affidavit is filed, in the light of the above observations made by this Court and as the grievance of the petitioner appears to be that the respondent authorities are initiating some action by issuing a show cause notice, which is not even challenged, this Court is not inclined to entertain the Writ petition. 5. In the aforesaid view of the matter, the Writ Petition is dismissed. No order as to costs. Miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shall stand closed. __________________ NINALA JAYASURYA,J Dt: 30.12.2025 SJ 5 131 THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE NINALA JAYASURYA WRIT PETITION NO: 15978 of 2018 Dated: 30.12.2025 SJ