IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH :: TUESDAY, THE FOURTH DAY OF FEBRUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE R RAGHUNANDAN RAO AND HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE HARINATH.N WRIT APPEAL NO: 16 OF 2019 . Writ Appeal under Clause 15 of the Letters Patent 02.05.2018 in WP No. 6674 of 2005 on the file of the High Court. Between: 1. The District Collector, Chittoor, Chittoor District 2. The Revenue Divisional officer, Tirupathi, Chittoor District. 3. The Mandal Revenue officer, Renigunta Mandal District. 4. The Mandal Surveyor, O/o the Mandal Surveyor, Renigunta Chittoor District. 5. The District Surveyor, Chittoor, Chittoor District amaravAh 'A against the Order dt. Renigunta, Chittoor Renigunta, ...RESPONDENTS/PETITIONERS AND 1. R Venkata Ratnam, S/o. Late Venkarao Moula Ali, Hyderabad-500047. 2. V. Sreedhar, S/o. Late V. Ramaiah, R/o. Chittoor District. 3. R.V Satyendranath, S/o. K. Ram Mohan Rao, R/o. 9-105A Venkateswara Nagar (South), Malkajgiri, Hyderabad-500047. R/o. MIG-54, APIIC, Colony 18-1-251, K.T. Road, Tirupathi ...RESPONDENTS lA NO: 2 OF 2019 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 suspend the operation of the order in W.P.No.6674 of 2005 dated 02-05-2018 pending decision in the above writ appeal Counsel for the Appellants: GP FOR REVENUE Counsel for the Respondents: SRI M N NARASIMHA REDDY. The Court made the following: ORDER APHC010052322019 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3488] TUESDAY, THE FOURTH DAY OF FEBRUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE R RAGHUNANDAN RAO & THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE HARINATH.N WRIT APPEAL No: 16 OF 2019 Between; The District Collector, Chittoor, Chittoor District and four others. ...Appellants AND R.Venkataramana and two others ...Respondents Counsel for the Appellants: Ld. Govt. Pleader for Revenue Counsel for the Respondents: Sri M.N.Narasimha Reddy The Court made the following order: (per Hon’ble Sri RRR, J) 1. The respondents herein, claim ownership over approximately 13 Acres of land being Ac. 1.41 cents in Sy.No.536, Ac.4.99 cents in Sy.No.537/1, Ac.3.48 cents in Sy.No.537/2 and Ac.3.48 cents in Sy.No.538 of Erramareddipalem Village, Renigunta Mandal, Chittoor -2- W.A. No.l6of 2019 District. The respondents contend that they had purchased these lands from the original owners viz., S.Ramanujulu and K.S.Ramanujam, who had been granted Ryotwari pattas under the provisions of the Andhra Pradesh (Andhra Area) Inam Abolition Act. :X 2. It is the case of the respondents that when the sale deeds obtained from their vendors were presented for registration, the registering authority refused to register the documents, forcing the respondents to approach the erstwhile High Court of Andhra Pradesh by way of W.P. No.2086 of 1995. This writ petition was allowed, with a direction to the authorities to register the documents as and when the said documents are presented. The respondents had subsequently presented the sale deeds which were registered. Thereafter applications were also made to the revenue authorities for necessary changes in the revenue records and issue of pattadar passbooks and title deeds. These applications were rejected by the Mandal Revenue Officer. The respondents again approached the erstwhile High Court of Andhra Pradesh V* -3- V W.A. No.16 of 2019 by way of W.P. No.3823 of 2001, challenging the said refusal. The erstwhile High Court of Andhra Pradesh, by an order dated 17.01.2001, allowed the writ petition directing the respondents to issue patta transfer certificate as well as no objection certificate to the petitioners. Aggrieved by the said order, the revenue authorities filed W.A. No. 172 of 2002 which came to be dismissed on 07.03.2002. After the dismissal of the writ appeal, the Mandal Revenue Officer had issued the patta transfer certificate in favour of the respondents on 23.04.2002 and no objection certificate on 23.05.2002. After the receipt of these documents, the respondents initiated developmental activities in their land. As some third parties were seeking to intervene, the respondents again approached the erstwhile High Court of Andhra Pradesh by way of W.P. No.4542 of 2004, for protection and the erstwhile High Court of Andhra Pradesh, by an order dated 08.04.2004 had directed the official respondents to provide necessary protection. .4. W.A. No.16 of 2019 3. After all these events, the Government sought to lay a road through the land claimed by the respondents. Aggrieved by this action, the respondents approached the erstwhile High Court of Andhra Pradesh by way of W.P. No. 1919 of 2005 which was allowed, on 10.03.2005, with a direction to the respondents therein not to lay a road through the land of the respondents herein, unless the same is acquired in accordance with law. It may also be recorded that the revenue authorities being aggrieved by the order in W.P. No. 1919 of 2005 had filed W.A. No.950 of 2005 which came to be dismissed on 30.10.2006. The Division Bench, after considering the earlier orders of the Court, had held that the learned single Judge was justified in following the earlier orders by directing the authorities not to interfere and not to lay a road through the land claimed by the respondents herein. 4. The Division Bench, while dismissing the writ appeal, had also observed that the order or orders passed in the earlier writ petitions would not preclude the competent authority from> independently adjudicating on the rights of the iFf -5- W.A. No.ieof 2019 vendors of the respondents herein. That in the event of any conclusion, that the vendors of the respondents herein do not have title over the land in question, it would be open to the State and its functionaries to apply for review of the orders passed by this Court in the earlier rounds of litigation. 5. The respondents herein had again approached the Mandal Revenue Officer to issue pattadar passbook, title deed and copies of 10(1) adangals in respect of the aforesaid lands. This request was refused by the Mandal Revenue Officer forcing the respondents to move the erstwhile High Court by way of W.P. No.6674 of 2005. A learned single judge of the erstwhile High Court at Hyderabad for the State of Telangana and the State of Andhra Pradesh disposed off the writ petition by an order dated 02.05.2018 directing the respondents to issue pattadar pass book and title deed and copies of 10(1) adangal to the respondents herein. 6. Aggrieved by the said order, the respondents in the writ petition have filed the present writ appeal. -6- W.A. No.16 of 2019 7. The leaned Government Pleader for Revenue would contend that the vendors of the respondents herein, do not have title over the land and an enquiry is being conducted in this regard. He would contend that till such enquiry is completed, issuance of any passbook and title deed and copies of the 10(1) adangals could result in a situation where the respondents herein would alienate their lands and create third party interest which would result in multiplicity of proceedings and creation of rights which are not warranted. 8. In support of his claim that the title of the vendors of the respondents herein, is suspect, the learned Government Pleader has sought to take us through various documents including the gazette notifications, of the years 1977 and 1984, delineating the land which had been categorized as communal lands as well the lands which are treated as private lands. 9. We do not propose to go into any of these issues for the simple reason that there have been a series of judgments of this"Court and the erstwhile High Court, holding that the -7- W.A. No.l6of 2019 respondents are entitled to the pattadar passbook, title deed and copies of 10(1) adangal. The observations of the Division Bench in the Judgment, dated 30.10.2006, in W.A. No.950 of 2005, merely stated that the authorities, if they are able to form an opinion, based on the documents, that the title of the vendors of the respondents is not correct can approach the Court by way of review of the earlier orders of the Court. This would mean that, unless and until the orders of the Court, in the proceedings mentioned above, are set aside by way of a review, it would not be open for the revenue authorities to raise the contention that the documents sought by the respondents shall not be issued till they complete the enquiry in this regard. Another aspect of the matter is that the alleged enquiry is 10. going on for the past 19 years. There is no certainty as to when the alleged enquiry would complete. In fact no details of the stage of the enquiry or what is being done in the enquiry have been set out before this Court. 11. For all the aforesaid circumstances, this Court is of the view that the refusal to issue the documents sought by the -8- W.A. No.16 of 2019 respondents is not backed by any provision of law. In fact it would be a violation of the directions of the Court, mentioned above. For all the aforesaid reasons, this writ appeal is dismissed 12. without costs. Miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending in this writ appeal 13. shall stand closed. Sd/- M. RAMESH BABU deputy registrar :1 //TRUE COPY// SECTION OFFICER To, Two CCs to GP for Revenue, High Court of Andhra Pradesh. [O^jy One CC to Sri M N Narasimha Reddy, Advocate [OPUC] Three CD Copies 1. 2. 3. TF HIGH COURT DATED:04/02/2025 ORDER WA.No.16of2019 E 11 APR 2025 ^ . Current Section . DISMISSING THE W.A., WITHOUT COSTS