4. IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH :: AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) TUESDAY, THE ELEVENTH DAY OF MARCH TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE VENKATESWARLU NIMMAGADDX' WRIT PETITION NO: 6081 OF 2025 Between: 1. Kunchala Srinivas, S/o Venkateswarlu, aged 53, R/o D.No. 2-27-210, opp. Goods shed. Vittal Nagar, Ramakrishnapuram, Chirala. 2. Yanamala Venkayamma, W/o Krishna Murthy, aged 57, R/o D.No. 2- 26-10, Vittal Nagar, Mahalakshmi temple, Chirala. ...PETITIONERS AND 1. The State of AP, Rep. by its Principal Secretary, Department of Revenue, A.P. Secretariat, Velagapudi, Amaravathi. 2. The District Collector, Bapatia District. 3. The Revenue Divisional Officer, Chirala, Bapatia District. 4. The Tahsildar, Chirala Mandal, Bapatia District. ...RESPONDENTS Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India is filed praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased to issue a Writ, order or a direction, more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus, declaring action of the 4th respondent in deleting the 1st petitioners name from the webland/online revenue records in respect of land admeasuring Ac 0.50 cents in Survey No. 464 of Perala Village, Chirala Mandal, Bapatia District (previously Prakasam District) as against law, highhanded, arbitrary and violative of principles of Natural Justice and 300-A of the Constitution of India and consequently I. direct the respondents to restore thetst petitioner s name in the webland/online revenue records in respect of the aforementioned land and II. direct the respondents herein to change the nature of classification of the land from government to private. lA NO: 1 OF Petition under Section 151 circumstances stated in the affidavit filed i Court may be pleased to direct the name in webland/online revenue records in respect of land admeasuring Ac 0.50 cents in Survey No. 464 of Perala Village, Chirala Mandal, Bapatia District (previously Prakasam District). Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI P VIVEK Counsel for the Respondents: GP FOR REVENUE The Court made the following: ORDER CPC is filed praying that in the in support of the petition, the High respondents to restore the 1®* petitioner’s r APHC010111092025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3329] 0 r T.*, TUESDAY .THE ELEVENTH DAY OF MARCH TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE VENKATESWARLU NIMMAGADDA WRIT PETITION NO: 6081/202.^ Between: Kunchala Srinivas and Others ...PETITIONER{S) AND The State Of Ap and Others Counsel for the Petitioner(S): 1.P VIVEK Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1.GP FOR REVENUE The Court made the following: ...RESPONDENT(S) 0 THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE VENKATESWARLU NIMMAGADDA WRIT PETITION NO:6081/2Q2fi ORDER: The present writ petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking following relief; to issue a Writ, order or a direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring action of the respondent In deleting the 1^' petitioners name from the webland/onllne revenue records in respect of land admeasuring Ac.0.50 cents in Sun/ey No.464 of Perala Village, Chirala Mandal, Bapatia District previously Prakasam District as against law, highhanded, arbitrary and violative of principles of Natural Justice and 300-A of the Constitution of India and consequently i) direct the respondents to restore the 1st petitioner’s the webland/online name in revenue records in respect of the aforementioned land and ii) direct the respondents herein to change the nature of classification of the land from government to private and pass such other order or orders....” 2. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned Government Pleader for Revenue for the respondents. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioners herein are the absolute owners and possessors of the land admeasuring to an extent of Ac.0.50 cents in Sy.No.464 of Perala Village, Chirala Mandal. Baptia District, having acquired the same through his ancestors/ father. Originally the subject property was purchased by the petitioners’ father through registered sale deed vide document No.2839/1986 on 08.09.1986. Since then, the father of the petitioners’ has been in peaceful possession and enjoyment of the subject land and his name was also mutated in the revenue records and pattadar pass books were also issued in his favour by the revenue authorities. Later, the petitioners’ father died in the year 1999. After his demise, the petitioner No.2 also relinquished her share to the petitioner No.1, as such petitioner No.1 became the absolute owner and possessor the subject property. While so, pursuant to the application submitted by the petitioner No.1 for mutation of his name in respect of the subject property, the then Tahsildar submitted a report on 07.02.2022 admitting the rights of the petitioner No.1 as the legal heir of his father. The said report also clarifies that the vendor of the petitioners’ father was alienated the subject land before 1954. As such, the provisions of the Andhra Pradesh Assigned Lands (Prohibition of Transfers) Act, 1977 (in short “Act 9 of 1977”) are not applicable. Therefore, keeping the subject land in the prohibited properties list under Section 22(A)(1) is contrary to the provisions of Act 9 of 1977. Hence, recommended for deletion of the subject land from the list of prohibited properties. He further submits that considering the report issued by the respondents, the authority concerned not deleted the subject property from the list of prohibited properties and mutated the name of the petitioner No.1 as pattadar and possessor of the subject land and also issued 1-B Register in his favour. While things stood thus, to the utter surprise of the petitioner No.1, now 4. the respondent No.4 issued pahani dated 11.02.2025 reversing the name of f t the petitioner No.1 by replacing his father’s name as pattadar of the subject land who expired in the year 1999, which is contrary to the principles of natural justice and also contrary to the provisions of the Act 9 of 1977. Aggrieved by the same, the petitioners herein filed the present writ petition. On the other hand, learned Government Pleader for the respondents 5. furnished written instructions dated 11.03.2025 issued by the Tahsildar/ respondent No.4. The relevant portion of the said instructions is extracted hereunder: "It is submitted that the Government vide circular memo No. REV 08-22/490/20-2024-General-IGRS, dt. 10.08.2024 have issued instructions to verify the lists of prohibited properties notified under Section 22A of Registration Act prior to the enforcement of Act No. 35 of 2023 and Department, G.O.Ms.No.596, dated.19.12.2023. Revenue (Lands-!) It is further submitted that Re-survey was completed in Perala Revenue Village. The applicant is in possession and enjoyment of Ac. 0.50 cents in Sy.No. 464 of Perala Village, During verification process, the name of the petitioner was shown as enjoyer in the Revenue records. Since, the re-verification of freeholds is under process, the applicant’s father name was reflected as "pattadar” in public domine against the subject land, his name will be recorded as pattadar in the web land after completion of freehold verification work in accordance with the rules. ” Learned Government Pleader for the respondents further submits that in view of the circular dated 10.08.2024, all the freehold properties as per the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act (in short ‘Act 30 of 2013’) and other deletion of properties from the list of prohibited properties were reviewed and also conducted resurvey. Therefore, after completion of entire exercise, the claim of the petitioner No.1 would be considered to replace the name of the petitioner No.1 in the place of his father. 6. Having regard to the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioners and learned Government Pleader for the respondents, on perusal of the material placed on record, it is observed that as per the report of the then Tahsildar dated 07.02.2022, the subject property was acquired by the father of the petitioners through registered title deed in the year 1986. It is also observed that the vendor of the petitioners’ father was also alienated the subject land in the year 1954. It is settled proposition of law, once the fact which is admitted by the respondents that even the original assignment was made on or before 1954, the provisions of Act 9 of 1977 will not applicable to the petitioner No.1 to enumerate the subject property under Section22(A)(1) of the Registration Act, 1908 as item of list of prohibitory properties. It is further observed that the competent authority rightly considered the report of the Tahsildar and deleted the property of the petitioner No.1 from the list of prohibitory properties and mutated the name of the petitioner No.1 as pattadar. It is further observed that on the guise of circular dated 10.08.2024 7. reversing the entire things which are settled as per the report dated 07.02.2022 and deletion of the subject property from the 22-A by the competent authority and again mutating the name of his father who died in the year 1999 is contrary to the facts in hand and on record held by them. Further, contended by the learned Government Pleader in view of the circular dated 10.08.2024 all the freehold properties which were happened in between 2023- 24 were put on hold for further enquiry cannot be sound enough, in respect of the subject matter is concerned for the reason admittedly, the provisions of Act 9 of 1977 is not applicable. Therefore, question of application of Act 30 of 2013 as well as the present circular dated 10.08.2024 does not arise. as In view of the foregoing discussion, the present writ petition is allowed, directing the respondents, more particularly, respondent No.4 herein to pass appropriate orders considering the report of the Tahsildar dated 07.02.2022 and grant mutation in favour of the petitioner No.1 in accordance with law within a period of two (02) months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. There shall be no order as to costs. 8. Consequently, Miscellaneous Petitions, if any, pending in the writ petition shall stand closed. Sd/- K. TATA RAO DEPUTY REGISTRAR //TRUE COPY// SECTION OFFICER To 1. The Principal Secretary, Department of Revenue, A.P. Secretariat Velagapudi, Amaravathi. 2. The District Collector, Bapatia District. 3. The Revenue Divisional Officer, Chirala, Bapatia District. 4. The Tahsildar, Chirala Mandal, Bapatia District. 5. One CC to Sri P Vivek Advocate [OPUC] 6. Two CCs to GP for Revenue, High Court Of Andhra Pradesh. [OUT] 7. Three CD Copies r TF HIGH COURT DATED:11/03/2025 ORDER WP.No.6081 of 2025 tP I 2'mar 2025 I Curreni Seciion ALLOWING THE W.P., WITHOUT COSTS