Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Andhra Pradesh · body

2025 DAILYLAW 6746 (AP)

Kuruba Nagaraju, v. The State of Andhra Pradesh,

WP/4027/2025 · 2025-02-17

Gannamaneni Ramakrishna Prasad

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

APHC010063962025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH (Special Original Jurisdiction) MONDAY, THE SEVENTEENTH TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE GANNAMANENI RAMAKRISHNA WRIT Between: 1. KURUBA NAGARAJU, ABOUT 61 YEARS, R/O. BHRAMASAMUDRAM VILLAGE, KANEKAL MANDAL, ANANTAPUR DISTRICT. 1. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, REVENUE DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT, AMARAVATI, ANDHRA PRADESH. 2. THE DIVISIONAL REVENUE OFFICER, KALYANDURG DIVISION, ANANTAPUR DISTRICT. 3. THE TAHSILDAR, KANEKAL MANDAL, ANANTAPUR DISTRICT. 4. DUDEKULA VENNUR BEE, W/O. DUDEKULA LALU SAB. AGED ABOUT 71 YEARS, R/O. B.C. COLONY VILLAGE, KANEKAL MANDAL, ANANTAPUR DISTRICT. 5. DUDEKULA ASHA BEE, W/O. DADA KALANDAR YEARS, R/O. B.C. COLONY KANEKAL MANDAL, ANANTAPUR Counsel for the Petitioner: IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) MONDAY, THE SEVENTEENTH DAY OF FEBRUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE GANNAMANENI RAMAKRISHNA PRASAD WRIT PETITION NO: 4027/2025 KURUBA NAGARAJU, S/O. LATE KURUBA GARJANNA, AGED ABOUT 61 YEARS, R/O. BHRAMASAMUDRAM VILLAGE, KANEKAL MANDAL, ANANTAPUR DISTRICT. ...PETITIONER AND THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL REVENUE DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT, AMARAVATI, ANDHRA PRADESH. THE DIVISIONAL REVENUE OFFICER, KALYANDURG DIVISION, ANANTAPUR DISTRICT. THE TAHSILDAR, KANEKAL MANDAL, ANANTAPUR DISTRICT. DUDEKULA VENNUR BEE, W/O. DUDEKULA LALU SAB. AGED 71 YEARS, R/O. B.C. COLONY, BHRAMASAMUDRAM MANDAL, ANANTAPUR DISTRICT. DUDEKULA ASHA BEE, W/O. DADA KALANDAR, AGED ABOUT 41 YEARS, R/O. B.C. COLONY, BHRAMASAMUDRAM ANANTAPUR DISTRICT. ...RESPONDENT(S): Counsel for the Petitioner: IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH [3328] DAY OF FEBRUARY THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE GANNAMANENI RAMAKRISHNA S/O. LATE KURUBA GARJANNA, AGED ABOUT 61 YEARS, R/O. BHRAMASAMUDRAM VILLAGE, KANEKAL ...PETITIONER THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL REVENUE DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT, THE DIVISIONAL REVENUE OFFICER, KALYANDURG DIVISION, THE TAHSILDAR, KANEKAL MANDAL, ANANTAPUR DISTRICT. DUDEKULA VENNUR BEE, W/O. DUDEKULA LALU SAB. AGED , BHRAMASAMUDRAM ABOUT 41 VILLAGE, ...RESPONDENT(S): 2 1. K SRINIVAS Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. GP FOR REVENUE The Court made the following: ORAL ORDER: Heard Sri K.Srinivas, learned Counsel for the Writ Petitioner and Sri K. Arjun Chowdary, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue. 2. The present Writ Petition is filed challenging the Order passed by the Tahsildar of Kanekal Mandal, dated 24.10.2024 bearing R.C.No.C/178/2024 (Ex.P1). This Court has perused the contents of the Impugned Order. The Tahsildar, Kanekal Mandal has rejected the Application of the Writ Petitioner on the ground that the request of the Writ Petitioner for issuance of Pattadar Pass Book will be considered subject to the result in O.S.No.184 of 2020 which is pending before the Civil Judge (Junior Division), Rayadurg. 3. When the Tahsildar, Kanekal Mandal has clearly stated that the issuance of the Pattadar Pass Book in favour of the Writ Petitioner will only be subject to the final result in the Civil Appeal, which is the only reason for rejecting the request of the Writ Petitioner, there is no occasion for the Writ Petitioner to have approached this Court by invoking Writ Jurisdiction. Admittedly, the Civil Suit bearing O.S.No.184 of 2020 is pending before the Civil Judge (Junior Division), Rayadurg. On query of this Court, the learned Counsel for the Writ Petitioner has submitted that the Defendants therein (Respondent Nos.4 and 5 in the present Writ Petition) have already filed Written Statements. 4. In view of the pendency of O.S.No.184 of 2020 on the file of the Civil Judge (Junior Division), Rayadurg, this Court is of the opinion that the Tahsildar, Kanekal Mandal has rightly rejected the request of the Writ Petitioner for issuance of Pattadar Pass Book. 3 5. In this view of the matter, the present Writ Petition is devoid of any merit. Accordingly, this Writ Petition is dismissed. No order as to costs. 6. Interlocutory Applications, if any, stand closed in terms of this order. _________________________________ GANNAMANENI RAMAKRISHNA PRASAD, J Date: 17.02.2025 DSV