::1:: APHC010101412020 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3329] WEDNESDAY,THE THIRD DAY OF SEPTEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE VENKATESWARLU NIMMAGADDA WRIT PETITION NO: 6206/2020 Between: 1. TUMPATI RAVI CHANDAR,, S/O JOSEPH, AGED 46 YEARS, R/O H.NO 5-33, VINOD NAGAR COLONY, LAKSHMIPURAM, JEELUGUMILLI MANDAL, WEST GODAVARI DISTRICT. ...PETITIONER AND 1. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP. BY ITS PRL. SECRETARY, PANCHAYATI RAJ AND RURAL DEVELOPMENT, SECREATARIATE, VELAGAPUDI, GUNTUR DISTRICT. 2. THE DISTRICT PANCHAYAT OFFICER, WEST GODAVARI DISTRICT, ELURU. 3. THE DIVISIONAL PANCHAYAT OFFICER, JANGAREDDYGUDEM, WEST GODAVARI DISTRICT. 4. THE SECRETARY, DARBAGUDEM GRAMA PANCHAYAT, DARDAGUDEM, JEELUGUMILLI MANDAL, WEST GODAVARI DISTRICT. 5. SMT KOTHAPALLI BHULAKSHMI, W/O LATE KRISHNAIAH, AGED 62 YEARS, R/O H.NO 5-68, VINOD NAGAR COLONY, ::2:: LAKSHMIPURAM, H/O DURBAGUDEM, JEELUGIMILLI MANDAL, WEST GODAVARI. ...RESPONDENT(S): 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 toto issue order direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of MANDUMUS declare the memo No. 25/2020- A4(PAN), dated 19-02-2020 issued by the 3rd respondent as illegal, arbitrary and violative of principles of natural justice and contrary to the provisions of Panchayat Raj Act and consequentially set aside the same and to pass Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. P R K AMERANDRA KUMAR Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. N SRIHARI (Standing Counsel for MPP ZPP and GRAM PANCHAYAT) 2. NIMMAGADDA REVATHI 3. GP FOR PANCHAYAT RAJ RURAL DEV (AP) ::3:: HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE VENKATESWARLU NIMMAGADDA W.P.No.6206 of 2020 This Court made the following ORDER: Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Standing Counsel for Panchayat Raj. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is an adopted son of husband of 5th respondent, who is the absolute owner and possessor of a house bearing No.5-68 situated at Vinod Nagar Colony, Lakshmipuram, Jeelugumilli Mandal, West Godavari District. It is stated that while so, the husband of the 5th respondent when he was alive had executed an un-registered Will dated 30.10.2013 alienating the subject property in favour of the petitioner herein. Considering the right of the petitioner, the Gram Panchayat got mutated the name of the petitioner as owner of the subject property and issued demand notice for the year 2017-18. While the respondent Nos.6 and 7 herein who on claiming as Class-II legal heirs of the 5th respondent had submitted a representation to the 4th respondent herein claiming that they inherited the property stands in ::4:: the name of the 5th respondent. Considering the claim of the Respondent Nos.6 and 7 herein the 4th respondent issued notices to the petitioner herein on 19.02.2020 stating that the mutation which was happened in favour of the petitioner is not genuine and not as per the legal claim of the petitioner in view of enquiry held by them and observed that the order of the assessment in respect of subject property in favour of the petitioner can be cancelled and the same was not challenged in this writ petition. 3. Learned counsel for Respondent Nos.6 and 7 submits that they are the legal heirs of the 5th respondent who succeeded the subject property from her husband and further stated that the petitioner got mutated his name by way of other means without there being any valid right over the subject property on the guise of created Will said to have been executed by husband of the 5th respondent. 4. On the other hand, Respondent No.4 filed counter-affidavit, wherein it is stated as under: “5. It is submitted that, I have submitted the report to the 3d respondent herein that Smt. Kothapalli Bhulakshmi residing with her sister at Puchikapadu and allowed the petitioner to reside on free of rent. The petitioner submitted a representation to the Gram Panchayat by misleading the facts and change the name of the ownership in the absence of 5th respondent. Now the 5th respondent submitted a representation with a request to change the name in her favour as she is the legal owner of the said property. I directed her to produce the relevant documents for mutation of the name, but the petitioner herein filed a representation to Gram Panchayat not to mutate the house in her favour as she is the owner of the property ::5:: as per will be executed by Kothapalli Krishnaiah @ Krishnamma. Mere assessment of house tax would not establish the right over the house property. The petitioner and the 5th respondent were informed that they have to submit the declaration from the competent authority regarding ownership and till then the Gram Panchayat could not change the name in the Gram Panchayat records. The Divisional Panchayat Officer called for report on the representation and as such I being the Panchayat Secretary submitted factual report and stage of the case. I have to take necessary action on the above representation as per rules and on establishment of ownership. But the petitioner without waiting approached this Hon’ble High Court and filed this present writ petition. 6. It is submitted that, the petitioner and the 5th respondent has to establish their right over the property and genuinely of the will or other documents said to have been existed and the ownership. After verifying the ownership only mutate the name of the owner in the Gram Panchayat records. Till then this respondent kept the assessment and collection of tax pertaining to petitioner scheduled property. 7. It is submitted that, the Hon’ble Court has been pleased to grant of order of status-quo obtaining as on today. It is submitted that in view of the orders of the Hon’ble court, this respondent not made any changes in the Gram Panchayat. The Respondent/Gram Panchayat is reserving the right to file the additional counter-affidavit if necessary. 5. Considering the submissions made by learned counsel for the petitioner, learned Standing Counsel for Respondent No.4 and learned counsel for Respondent Nos.6 and 7 and material placed on record, it is observed that the subject house was assessed for property tax in the name of the petitioner herein which indicates that the petitioner is in possession and enjoyment of the property. Learned counsel for Respondent Nos.6 and 7 also states that the petitioner is in possession and enjoyment of the property without there being any valid right over the subject property what-so-ever and by creation of an ::6:: un-registered Will, which was said to have been executed by the husband of 5th respondent. He further submits that as Class II legal heirs of 5th Respondent, Respondent Nos.6 and 7 are entitled to own the subject property in view of the provisions of The Hindu Succession Act, 1956. 6. The contention of the respondent Nos.6 and 7 that by considering the claim of the Respondent Nos.6 and 7 the 4th respondent rightly issued notice to the petitioner for change of assessment/mutation at Panchayat property records against the subject property in favour of the Respondent Nos.6 and 7. The counter-affidavit of the 4th respondent also reveals that the petitioner mislead the 4th respondent for getting mutation in his favour. Irrespective of the mutation and assessment by the 4th respondent, for one reason or the other, the petitioner is in possession and enjoyment of the subject property and by changing the mutation or assessment order in panchayat records, the possession of the property cannot be entitled by the un-official respondents herein, without there being any dictum by competent civil Court. Therefore, due to the facts as stated above they shall invoke the jurisdiction before Court of law for getting valid rights over the subject property by proving themselves as legal ::7:: heirs of the 5th respondent and 5th respondent to be declared as absolute owner of the subject property. 7. Therefore, in view of the reasons stated above, the parties herein directed to resolve their disputes / ownership rights over the subject property by way of invoking appropriate civil proceedings before the jurisdictional Court of law. Till further orders to be passed by the Court of law, the 4th Respondent hereby directed to maintain status-quo in respect of its assessment register in respect of the subject house property in levying house tax. 8. With the above direction, the Writ Petition is disposed of. No costs. Consequently, miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending in this writ petition shall stand closed. __________________________________ VENKATESWARLU NIMMAGADDA, J 03.09.2025 krk ::8:: HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE VENKATESWARLU NIMMAGADDA W.P.No.6206 of 2020 03.09.2025 krk 111