IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH :: AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) FRIDAY, THE SEVENTH DAY OF MARCH TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE VENKATESWARLU NIMMAGADDA WRIT PETITION NO: 5620 OF 2025 Between: Kommineni Chinna Venkata Ramanamma, W/o Lokeswara Rao, Aged 47 years, Occ; House wife, R/o H. No.6-117-1, Pamuru-(R) Village, Kovilampadu (Sachivalyam), C.S. Puram Mandal, Prakasam District, Andhra Pradesh. ...Petitioner AND 1. The State of Andhra Pradesh, Rep. by its Principal Secretary Revenue Department, Secretariat, Velagapudi, Amaravathi, Guntur District. 2. The District Collector, Ongole, Prakasam District. 3. The Revenue Divisional Officer, , Kanigiri Division, Prakasam District. . 4. The Tahsildar, C.S. Puram Mandal, Prakasam District ...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 inaction on the part of the M of respondent No.3 and 4 in not effecting the mutations on the name of the petitioner in all the concerned revenue records including the State Web land in respect of the land to a total extent of Ac.4.83 cents, i.e. an extent of Ac.3.27 cents in Sy.No.263/1 and an extent of Ac.1.56 cents in Sy.No.334/10, Kovilampadu Panchayath, C.S. Puram Mandal, Prakasam District, by considering the mutation application No. MUT230814130889, dt.14.08.202314.08.2023, as illegal, arbitrary. Contrary to the Provisions of A.P. Rights in Land and Pattadar Passbooks Act, 1971, and in violation of and Articles 14 and 21 of Constitution of India and consequentially direct the respondents to consider the mutation application No. MUT230814130889, dt. 14.08.2023 and affect the mutations in respect of land to a total extent of Ac.4.83 cents, i.e. an extent of Ac.3.27 cents in Sy.No.263/1 and an extent of Ac.1.56 cents in Sy.No.334/10, Kovilampadu Panchayath, C.S. Puram Mandal, Prakasam District, on the name of the petitioner in all the concerned revenue records including the State Web- land in the interest of justice. 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 direct to direct the respondent Nos.3 and 4 to affect the mutation in respect of land to a total extent of Ac.4.83 cents, i.e. an extent of Ac.3.27 cents in Sy.No.263/1 and an extent of Ac. 1.56 cents in Sy.No.334/10, Kovilampadu Panchayath, C.S. Puram Mandal, Prakasam District, on the name of the petitioner in all the concerned revenue records including in the State Web-land considering the mutation application No. MUT230814130889, dt.14.08.2023 of the petitioner forthwith pending disposal of the main writ petition. Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI. BONU RAMA SHANKAR RAO Counsel for the Respondents: GP FOR REVENUE The Court made the following order: APHC010102302025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3329] FRIDAY, THE SEVENTH DAY OF MARCH TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE VENKATESWARLU NIMMAGADDA WRIT PETITION NO: 5620/2025 Between: Kommineni Chinna Venkata Ramanamma ...PETITIONER AND The State Of Andhra Pradesh and Others ...RESPONDENT(S) Counsel for the Petitioner: 1.BONU RAMA SHANKAR RAO Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1.GP FOR REVENUE The Court made the following: 2 THE HQN’BLE SRt JUSTI^F WRIT PETITIOM cc-.,, ^g!!»<AIESWARLU NIMM^r.Anr^^ OF 202fi ORDER:- This writ petition i seeking the following relief 's filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of the India nature of WRIT OF MANDAM 111 one in the of the respondents more particularlv fZ'^^ inaction on the part AND 4 in not effecting the Inutationlon thT^'°'^ respondent No. 3 a// the concerned revenue record! Z lr the petitioner in respect of the land to a total extent ofAc Ac.3.27 cents in Sy.No 263/1 and an ' o.an extent of Sy.No.334/10. Kov„e/;ZV PanZylT'^ - Prakasam District hv C.S.Puram Mandal ^oMUT230814130889, dt.14 08 202T application to the Provisions of A P Riahts in i and ^''^'^rary, contrary 1971, and in violation of r^dLis' and consequentially direct the resnnndani! ^ ^Constitution of India application No.MUT2308141308^1 dfl^fno mutations in respect of land fn a tni 1 '^■^^■9023 and a extent of Ac.3.27 cents in Sy No ^lTand ' ® cents in Sy.No.334/in ir^',-, ^,^^^^'^^^1entofAc.1.56 Mandal, Prakasam District on 'thenarnp C.S.Puram concerned revenue recordin 1 petitioner in all the interest ofjustice and pass such oeT?ordlrZZeZ"":'^"" mutation affect the 2. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the respondents. 3. The petitioner i Naryaanamma, w/o. the land to IS one of the legal heirs late Suryanaryana, who i a total extent of Ac.4.83 of deceased Nayudu IS original pattadar in respect of cents, i.e., an extent of Ac.3.27 cents iin Sy.No.263/1 and an extent of Ac.1.56 cents in Sy.No.334/10, Kovilampadu Panchayath, C.S.Puram Mandal Prakasam District. The petitioner submitted 3 original pattadar, on the ground that the deceased executed an unregistered settlement deed in her favour in respect of entire extent of land, as mentioned above. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner herein 4. submitted an application for mutation in her favour, basing upon the settlement\possession agreement dated 15.06.2011, executed by original pattadar. He further submits that even though the application is submitted by the petitioner since long time, so far change of record was not happened. Hence, the writ petition. On the other hand, learned Government Pleader furnished written 5. th respondent, wherein, it is stated that the instructions issued by the 4 petitioner sought for change/mutation of record, basing upon an unregistered settlement/possession agreement. The alleged transfer of the land by the original pattadar in favour of the petitioner was not through the regular registered deed, in the absence of the same, the claim of the petitioner cannot be considered and accordingly, the same was placed before the competent authority-3'’'^ respondent, to pass appropriate orders, which is pending for consideration. Having regard to submissions made by both the learned counsel and on 6. perusal of the material placed on record, it is observed that the claim of the petitioner seeking mutation\change of record from the original pattadar by name Nayudu Naryaanamma, basing upon an unregistered 4 settlement/possession agreement, is not a valid. However, it is observed the document placed before this Court is executed only on a stamp paper of Rs.10/- and it is not li- a valid stamp even for commercial agreement in respect of immovable property. Basing upon such a document, the claim of the petitioner is certainly not valid and sustainable. r 1*^ However, the claim of the petitioner is pending with the 3^^ respondent for consideration. 7. Therefore, the respondent is directed to pass appropriate orders, within a period of six (06) weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of the order. 8. With the above direction, the Writ Petition is disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs. Consequently, Miscellaneous Petitions, petition shall stand closed. if any, pending in the writ Sd/- M SRiNIVAS ASSISTANT REGISTRY //TRUE COPY// To, SECTION OFFICER 1. The Principal Secretary Revenue Department, State of Andhra Pradesh, Secretariat, Velagapudi, Amaravathi, Guntur District. 2. The District Collector, Ongole, Prakasam District. 3. The Revenue Divisional officer, Kanigiri Division, Prakasam District. . 4. The Tahsildar, C.S. Puram Mandal, Prakasam District 5. One CC to Sri. Bonu Rama Shankar Rao Advocate [OPUC] 6. Two CCs to GP for Revenue, High Court Of Andhra Pradesh. 7. Three CD Copies [OUT] GSC HIGH COURT DATED:07/03/2025 ORDER WP.No.5620 of 2025 anoh^ g 0 I APR 2025 ^ . Current Sectinn DISPOSING OF THE WP WITHOUT COSTS