1 APHC010392502025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3208] MONDAY,THE TWENTY NINETH DAY OF DECEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE D RAMESH WRIT PETITION NO: 20402/2025 Between: 1. ROKKAM SAIKUMAR, S/O LATE ROKKAM RAM MOHAN RAO, AGED ABOUT 77 YEARS, OCC RETD. ENGINEER, R/O FLAT NO.201 ASPEN HEIGHTS, DASPALLA HILLS VISAKHAPATNAM. 2. SMT. ROKKAM RENUKA, W/O LATE R VENKATESWARA RAO AGED 68 YEARS, R/O. D.NO.15-1-36, VOUNTAGEDDA AREA, NOUROJI ROAD, VISAKHAPATNAM. 3. ROKKAM NAVEEN, S/O LATE RUKKAM SUDHAKAR AGED 40 YEARS, R/O. D.NO. 11-9-17, GANGOTHRI APARTMENTS, DASAPALLA HILLS, VISAKHAPATNAM . 4. SMT. N. INDIRA VISWANATH,, W/O N. VISWANATH AGED 60 YEARS, R/O. M.K. ROYAL APARTMENT, NOUROJI ROAD, MAHARANIPETA, VISAKHAPATNAM DISTRICT. ...PETITIONER(S) AND 1. STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, , REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY REVENUE DEPARTMENT. 2 SECRETARIAT, VELAGAPUDI, AMARAVATI, GUNTUR DISTRICT. 2. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, VISAKHAPATNAM 3. THE JOINT COLLECTOR, VISAKHAPATNAM 4. REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER, VISAKHAPATNAM 5. TAHSILDAR, GAJUWAKA MANDAL VISAKHAPATNAMDISTRICT 6. SMT MUVVA SRILATHA, W/O LATE SEKHAR AGED ABOUT 38 YEARS, R/O. D.NO.9-19-4, C.B.M. COMPOUND, VISAKHAPATNAM-3. 7. POTHINENI SRI RAMAKRISHNA, S/O. VENKATA SUBBA RAO, R/O. FLAT N0.3-A, PRAGATHI SUN AND SEA APARTMENTS, EAST POINT COLONY, VISAKHAPATNAM. 8. BOPPANA ANNAPURNA, W/O. PRASAD, R/O. D.NO. 13/140, PATIMEEDA, GUDIVADA, KRISHNA DISTRICT. 9. BUDDLIRAJU LALITHA DEVI, W/O. SURYANARAYANA RAJU, R/O. A-BLOCK, 202, PARADISE APARTMENTS. 0PP. RYTHU BAZAR, SETHAMMADHARA, VISAKHAPATNAM. 10. GADDA SATYA NARAYANA, S/O. BULLI JALAMANNA, R/O. TORREDN VILLAGE AND POST, RAJAHMUNDRY, EAST GODAVARI DISTRICT. ...RESPONDENT(S): Counsel for the Petitioner(S): 1. V V SATISH 3 Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. GP FOR REVENUE The Court made the following: 4 THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE D.RAMESH WRIT PETITION No.20402 of 2025 ORDER: The present writ petition is filed seeking the following relief: “….to issue any writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of writ of mandamus declaring the action of respondents in not considering the revision dated 23-07-2018 despite report submitted by the 5th respondent on 25-08-2021 is illegal, arbitrary and violation of article 14, 300-A of the constitution and to consequently direct the respondents to consider the revision in the light of the report submitted on 25-08-2021 by the 5th respondent ….” 2. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue appearing for respondent Nos.1 to 5. 3. The contention of the learned counsel for the petitioners is that the 4th respondent–Revenue Divisional Officer, Visakhapatnam had changed the revenue records modifying the entries related to Survey No.124/1 whereunder the total extent of land Ac.14.00 cents, which was continuing on the name of the brother of the 1st petitioner Sri Rokkam Radhakrishna in revenue records, has been reduced to Ac.12.91 cents. While changing 5 the entries, the 4th respondent has not issued any notice either to the petitioners or brother of the 1st petitioner. Accordingly, the brother approached the 2nd respondent - District Collector, Visakhapatnam and submitted a revision on 23.07.2018 against the unauthorized change of revenue entries without notice. Despite receipt of the revision, the 2nd respondent has not considered the same and not disposed of. Hence, the brother has once again made a complaint through spandana on 26.07.2021. Based on the same, the 2nd respondent - District Collector has sought a report from the 5th respondent. Accordingly, the 5th respondent has submitted a report on 25.08.2021. Despite receipt of the report from the 5th respondent, the 2nd respondent has not considered the revision filed by the brother of the 1st petitioner and not disposed of the same. Hence, the present writ petition. 4. Learned Assistant Government Pleader along with the instructions has got the orders passed by the 3rd respondent on 15.06.2018. He submitted that the 3rd respondent has considered the application/revision filed by the brother of the 1st petitioner and the same was disposed of on 15.06.2018. 6 5. Reply to the same, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioners has categorically stated that the brother of the 1st petitioner has filed the revision petition on 23.07.2018 and the Collector has sought report from the 5th respondent and accordingly, the 5th respondent has forwarded the report on 25.08.2021. So, when the revision petition is filed on 23.07.2018, the question of disposal of the revision by the 3rd respondent on 15.06.2018 would not arise. 6. Considering the said submissions, as this Court is not inclined to go into the merits of the case, the Writ Petition is disposed of directing the respondents to consider the revision filed by the brother of the 1st petitioner on 23.07.2018 and also by considering the report submitted by the 5th respondent on 25.08.2021 and if required, by issuing notice to the petitioners as well as the unofficial respondents, the revision may be decided within a period of two (2) months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order as per the provisions of the Andhra Pradesh Rights in Land and Pattadar Pass Books Act, 1971. There shall be no order as to costs. 7 As a sequel, miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shall stand closed. _______________________ JUSTICE D.RAMESH Date: 29.12.2025 Ivd 8 THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE D.RAMESH WRIT PETITION No.20402 of 2025 Dated: 29.12.2025 Ivd