IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH :: AMAR (Special Original Jurisdiction) MONDAY, THE THIRD DAY OF MARCH TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE VENKATESWARLU NIMMAGADDA WRIT PETITION NO: 5058 OF 2025 -N ■> O 7 o ■0 Between: Meesala Narayanamm, W/o. Satyanarayana, aged 55 Housewife, R/o. Anandapuram Village and Mandal, Visakhapatnam District. years, Occ; ...PETITIONER AND 1. The State of Andhra Pradesh, rep. by its Principal Secretary to Government, Revenue Department, Secretariat, Velagapudi, Amaravathi, Guntur District. 2. The District Collector, Visakhapatnam District at Visakhapatnam. 3. The Joint Collector, Visakhapatnam District at Visakhapatnam. 4. .The Revenue Divisional Officer, Bhimunipatnam Revenue Division Bhimunipatnam, Visakhapatnam District. 5. The Tahsildar, Anandapuram Mandal, Visakhapatnam District. 6. Paluri Appalanarayana, W/o. Late Naidu, aged 55 years, Occ Cultivation, R/o. D.No. 222915, Kanchara Veedhi, Visakhapatnam City Visakhapatnam District. 7. Biyyala Ramanamma, W/o. Appalanaidu, Occ Cultivation,aged 52 years, R/o. Near Saibaba Temple, Anandapuram Village and Mandal, Visakhapatnam District. 8. Tippalagiri Sanyasamma, W/o. Trimurthulii, Occ Cultivation years, R/o. Kanchara Veedhi, Visakhapatnam City and Visakhapatnam District. at aged 51 ...RESPONDENTS 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 to issue a writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of WRIT OF MANDAMUS declaring the action of Respondents particularly Respondent No.5 in mutating the names of Respondent No’s 6 to 8 in all record of rights connected to petitioners agricultural landed properties admeasuring Ac. 0.85 Cents comprising Ac. 0.35 Cents and Ac. 0.50 Cents respectively covered by Sy. No’s 218/23 and 218/26 situated in Anandapuram Village and Mandal, Visakhapatnam District irregular, irrational without jurisdiction and in violative of provisions of Andhra Pradesh Rights in Land and Pattadar Passbook Act, 1971 and Rules framed there under and offends Articles 14, 21 and 300-A of the Constitution of India and consequently direct the Respondents particularly Respondent No. 5 to restore the petitioner name in entire record of rights connected to her said lands. r more as illegal more lA NO: 1 OF 2025 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 mutation entries recorded in the name of respondents 6 to 8 in record of rights i.e. IB Registrar, Adangal pahanis and E-Pattadar Passbook and title deed connected covered by Sy.No’s. 218/23 and 218/26 of Anandapuram Village Mandal, Visakhapatnam District, pending disposal of main writ petition. to petitioner lands and Counsel for the Petitioner: M/s. NIMMAGADDA REVATHI Counsel for the Respondent Nos.1 to 5: GP FOR REVENUE Counsel for the Respondent Nos.6 to 8: The Court made the following: ORDER APHC010095732025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3329] ■■■;■ ■ MI”.' MONDAY ,THE THIRD DAY OF MARCH TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE VENKATESWARLU NIMMAGADDA WRIT PETITION NO: 5058/2025 Between: ...PETITIONER Meesala Narayanamm AND ...RESPONDENT(S) The State Of Ap and Others Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. NIMMAGADDA REVATHI Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1.GP FOR REVENUE The Court made the following: "'V'i 2 % VENKATESWARLU NIWIMAGADDA WRIT PETIT»<^>^ 5058/2025 THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE ORDER: under Article 226 of the Constitution This writ petition is filed India seeking the following reliefs:- of the ■to issue a writ, order or direction more the nature of Writ of Mandamus deciarmg trie action respondents more ™rigrits "Td Tp^mo:: "^c,:t^:i — propels r:ss™v."s c,» .3™ “3 s R/ghfs in Land and Arf/c/es 14 21 and 300-A of framed there under and 0 ronseauently direct the ‘p:msT said iands and pass such drier order. in and the learned counsel for the petitioner Government Pieader for the respondents. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner owner and possessor 2. Heard the learned submits that the of the land the absolute extent of Ac.0.85 cents comprising Ac.0.35 cents .50 cents respectiveiy covered in Survey Nos.218/23 and Mandal, through a petitioner is admeasuring to an and Ac.O and Village Anandapuram having acquired the same settlement deed dated situated in 218/26 District, Visakhapatnam 22.07.1992. Since, the registered gift ET X unofficial respondents herein are interfering with the peaceful possession and enjoyment of the petitioner, the petitioner filed O.S.No.182 of 2006 on the file of the VI Additional Senior Judge, Visakhapatnam. After trial and evidence, the Court was pleased to pass a judgment and decree in favour of the petitioner on 21.06.2011 holding that the petitioner is the absolute owner and possessor of the subject property. Civil below 4. While so, the unofficial respondents challenged the said judgment and decree by way of an appeal i.e., A.S.No.135 of 2011 on the file of XI Additional District Judge at Visakhapatnam, wherein the Appellate Court reversed the judgment and decree in respect of an extent of Ac.0.18 cents in survey No.218/25 holding that the unofficial respondents herein are vested with the rights in respect of part of the said property i.e., Ac.0.18 cents only. It is further observed that the land in survey No.218/25 is in between the S.No.218/26 and S.No.218/23. Therefore, the unofficial respondents are entitled to share an extent of Ac.0.18 cents in Sy.No.218/2025. Challenging the judgment and decree dated 24.01.2018 passed in the appeal, the petitioner preferred Second Appeal i.e., S.A.No.738 of 2018 on the file of this Court and the same is pending for consideration. 5. Learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that the guise of the judgment and decree dated 24.01.2018 on in 4 A.S.No.135 of 2011, the official respondents have carried out the amendments in the revenue records infavour of the unofficial f respondents holding that the unofficial respondents are pattadars and possessors of the entire land in survey No.218/25, which is even contrary to the judgment rendered in A.S.No.135 of 2011. Therefore, the entries made by the respondents are contrary to the judgments in O.S.No.182 of 2006 as well as A.S.No.135 of 2011. Hence, the entries made in respect of Survey No.218/25 are liable to be set aside. 6. On the other hand, learned Government Pleader for the respondents furnished written instructions dated 31.01.2025, wherein it is stated that the petitioner submitted the objections to the 5‘'^ respondent herein objecting the mutation infavour of the unofficial respondents. Considering the objections of the petitioner and claims of the unofficial respondents herein, the 5'*^ respondent passed a detailed speaking order/proceedings on 31.01.2025. If the petitioner th aggrieved by the speaking order/proceedings passed by the 5 respondent, the petitioner at liberty to challenge the speaking order/proceedings of the 5‘^ respondent by way of an appeal before the 4^*^ respondent, who is an appellate authority. I 7. Having regard to the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Government Pleader for the respondents and in view of the speaking order passed by the 5th 5 respondent dated 31.01.2025 and considering the grievance of the petitioner which was placed before this Court by way of this Writ Petition, this Court is of the considered opinion that the petitioner is entitled to challenge the same by way of statutory appeal before the respondent herein, if she aggrieved. 8. Accordingly, the Writ Petition is disposed of directing the th petitioner to assail the speaking order/proceedings of the 5 respondent dated 31.01.2025 by way of statutory appeal before the 4*'^ respondent within a period of four(4) weeks from the date of receipt of copy of this Order. After preferring such appeal by the petitioner, the 4*'^ respondent shall consider the same after providing opportunity of hearing to the petitioner as well as the unofficial respondents and after conducting an enquiry afresh and dispose of the same in accordance with law within a period of six(6) months thereafter. In the meanwhile, all the parties are directed to maintain status-quo obtaining as on today in respect of the subject property. There shall be no order as to costs. As a sequel miscellaneous application, pending, if any, shall also stand closed. Sd/-B.PRASADA RAO ASSISTANT REGISTRAR //TRUE COPY// SECTION OFFICER To, Principal Secretary to Government, Revenue Department, State of Andhra Pradesh, Secretariat, Velagapudi, Amaravathi, Guntur District. 2. The District Collector, Visakhapatnam District at Visakhapatnam. 1. The '< 3. The Joint Collector, Visakhapatnam District at Visakhapatnam. 4. .The Revenue Divisional Officer. Bhimunipatnam Revenue Division Bhimunipatnam, Visakhapatnam District. 5. The Tahsildar, Anandapuram Mandal, Visakhapatnam District. 6. One CC to M/s. Nimmagadda Revathi, Advocate [OPUC] 7. Two CCs to GP for Revenue, High Court of Andhra Pradesh. 8. Three CD Copies. at [OUT] ssb HIGH COURT DATED:03/03/2025 ORDER AND/^ ffx 19 MAR 2025 U ^ Current Section ^»tS°gSPATCW^St^ WP.No.5058 of 2025 DISPOSING OF THE W.P. WITHOUT COSTS