i APHC010090282022 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) FRIDAY, THE EIGHTEENTH DAY OF JULY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE T.C.D.SEKHAR WRIT PETITION NO: 5591 OF 2022 Between: Rangala Appala Raju, S/o late Rangala Thathaabbai, Hindu Aged about Rama Lakshmi colony, Maharanipeta, 43 years, R/o. Angadi Dibba Visakhapatnam. ...Petitioner AND 1. The State of Andhra Pradesh, Rep by its Principal Secretary Department, Secretariat, Velagapudi, Amaravathi. Revenue 2. The District collector, Visakhapatnam, Visakhapatnam District. 3. The Revenue Divisional officer, Anakapalli, Visakhapatnam District. 4. The Thasildhar, Rambilli, Rambilli Mandal Visakhapatnam 5. Rangala Ramulamma, W/o Late Rangala Thathabbai, Hindu District. Aged abot 63 Years, R/o. D.No. 14-33-37/9c, Angadi Dibba Ramalakshmi colony. Maharanipeta Visakhapatnam, Visakhapatnam District 6. Peetha Pydithalli, W/o Sanyasi Rao, Hindu, aged 38 years, R/o. D.No.18-14-25, Pedanandupuru, Pedagantyada Mandal, Visakhapatnam District. Gajuwaka ...Respondents . Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith praying that in the the High Court may be % pleased to issue a writ or order more particularly one in the nature of writ of mandamus or an appropriate writ or order declaring the orders in Appeal No 1066 of 2018 dt 22.01.2022 passed by the 3rd Respondent arbitrary and contrary to the principles of natural justice and consequently aside the same. is as illegal set lA NO: 1 OF 2027 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 orders passed by the 3rd Respondent in Appeal No 1066 of 2018 dt 22.01.2022 pending disposal of the writ petition. Counsel for the Petitioner: M/S. K.S.G. PADMAVATHI Counsel for the Respondent Nos. 1 to 4: GP FOR REVENUE Counsel for the Respondent Nos. 5 & 6; SRI SIMHACHALAM KARUKOLA The Court made the following order: . 1 APHC010090282022 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3505] FRIDAY,THE EIGHTEENTH DAY OF JULY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE T.C.D.SEKHAR WRIT PETITION No.5591/2022 Between: 1.RANGALA APPALA RAJU, S/0 LATE RANGALA THATHAABBAI HINDU AGED ABOUT 43 YEARS, R/0. ANGADI DIBBA, RAMA LAKSHMI COLONY, MAHARANIPETA, VISAKHAPATNAM ...PETITIONER AND 1.THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY REVENUE DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT, VELAGAPUDI, AMARAVATHI. 2.THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, VISAKHAPATNAM VISAKHAPATNAM DISTRICT. 3.THE REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER, ANAKAPALLI, VISAKHAPATNAM DISTRICT. 4.THE THASILDHAR, RAMBILLI, RAMBILLI MANDAL VISAKHAPATNAM DISTRICT. 5. RANGALA RAMULAMMA, W/0 LATE RANGALA THATHABBAI, HINDU, AGED ABOT 63 YEARS, R/0. D.NO. 14-33-37/90, ANGADI DIBBA RAMALAKSHMI 2 COLONY, MAHARANIPETA VISAKHAPATNAM DISTRICT 6.PEETHA PYDITHALLI, W/0 SANYASI RAO AGED 38 YEARS, R/0. PEDANANDUPURU, PEDAGANTYADA GAJUWAKA, VISAKHAPATNAM DISTRICT. VISAKHAPATNAM, HINDU, D.NO.18-14-25, MANDAL, ...RESPONDENT(S): praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased topleased to issue a writ or order more particularly one in the nature o writ of mandamus dr an appropriate writ or order declaring the orders in Appeal No 1066 of 2018dt 22.01.2022 passed by the 3rd Respondent is as illegal , arbitrary and contrary to the principles of natural justice and consequently set aside the same and pass lA NO: 1 OF 2022 Petition under Section 151 CPC circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased pleased to suspend the orders passed b the 3rd Respondent in Appeal No 1066 of 2018 dt 22.01.2022 pending disposal of the writ petition, and Counsel for the Petitioner: I.K.S.G. PADMAVATHI Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1.GP FOR REVENUE 2.SIMHACHALAM KARUKOLA The Court made the following: Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying that in the pass 3 1 f HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE T.C.D. SEKHAR WRIT PETITION No.5591 of 2022 ORDER:- 1. The petitioner claims that he is the absolute owner and possessor of land admeasuring to an extent of Ac.0.22 cents in Sy.No.43-2/A, to an extent of Ac.0.22 cents in Sy.No.43-2C, to an extent of Ac.0.21 cents in Sy.No.43-5B, to an extent of Ac.0.47 cents in Sy.No.43-5C, to an extent of Ac.0.70 cents in Sy.No.48- 5/A, to an extent of Ac.0.05 cents in Sy.No.48-8A and to an extent of Ac.0.10 cents in Sy.No.113-11, situated at Kondaladeemudupalem Village, Rambili Mandal, Visakhapatnam District. It is the case of the petitioner that his father Sri Rangala Thathabbai was the original owner of the above said land. During his life time he executed a Will dated 31.01.2004 bequeathing the subject lands in favour of the petitioner. It is his further case that after acquiring the right, title and interest over the lands in dispute, he approached the 4‘^ respondent to mutate his name and to issue pattadar pass books in respect of the subject lands. The 4**^ respondent after conducting enquiry, the 4 2. th respondent issued pattadar pass books in favour of petitioner by duly mutating his name in revenue records, except an extent of Questioning the issuance of Ac.0.10 cents in Sy.No.113/11. pattadar pass books in favour of the petitioner, the respondent Nos.5 & 6 filed appeal under Section 5(5) of Act 26 of 1971, 4 . # before the 3'"' respondent. After hearing the parties, the S'"* respondent by impugned order dated 22.01.2022 allowed the appeal and set aside the pattadar pass books issued in favour of the petitioner over the subject lands. Aggrieved by the said order, the present writ petition is filed. Heard counsel for the petitioner, counsel for the respondent Nos.5 & 6 and learned Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue. 3. The counsel for the petitioner would contend that the appeal filed by the respondent Nos.5 & 6 is not maintainable in view of the ratio down by this Court in the case of ‘Smt Ratnamma Vs. Revenue Divisional Officer, Dhamavaram^ On perusal of the appeal filed by the respondent Nos.5 & 6, it is clear that, they have questioned the pattadar pass books issued to the petitioner. As rightly contended by the counsel for the petitioner, the Division Bench of erstwhile High Court of Judicature at Hyderabad for the State of Telangana and the State of Andhra Pradesh, in Ratnamma Vs. The Revenue Divisional Officer, Anantapur District and two (02) others, after a review of the provisions of RoR Act had held that there is no appeal provided against the issuance of pattadar pass book and title deeds. In the present case the appeal was filed against the issuance of pattadar pass book. The issue involved in the present writ petition is no more res Integra as the Division Bench has taken a view that, appeal under Section 5(5) of Act 26 of 1971 is 4. 5. 12015 (5) ALT 228 (DB) %■ -- 5 not maintainable as against the issuance of pattadar pass books. In view of the Judgment of Division Bench in Ratnamma’s case, such appeal is not maintainable. 6. In view of the above, following the ratio laid down by this Court in Ratnamma’s case reported in (2015) 6 ALD 609 (DB), the impugned order is liable to be set aside. 7. Accordingly, the impugned order is set aside and the writ petition is allowed. It is needless to mention that the respondent Nos.5 & 6 are at liberty to question the issuance of pattadar pass books issued in favour of the petitioners before the appropriate Forum if they are so advised. There shall be no order as to costs. As a sequel, pending applications, if any, shall stand closed. Sd/- KJ.RAJA BABU ASSISTANT REGISTRAR //TRUE COPY// SECTION OFFICER To 1. The Principal Secretary, Revenue Department, Secretariat, Velagapudi, Amaravathi. 2. The District collector, Visakhapatnam, Visakhapatnam District. 3. The Revenue Divisional officer, Anakapalli, Visakhapatnam District. 4. The Thasildhar, Rambilli, Rambilli Mandal Visakhapatnam District. 5. One CC to Sri K.S.G. Padmavathi, Advocate [OPUC] 6. Two CCs to GP for Revenue, High Court of Andhra Pradesh [OUT] 7. One CC to Sri Simhachalam Karukola, Advocate [OPUC] 8. Two CD Copies TF HIGH COURT DATED:18/07/2025 ORDER WP NO. 5591 OF 2022 ALLOWING THE W.P. WITHOUT COSTS