APHC010045602026 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3558] TUESDAY,THE THIRD DAY OF FEBRUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE CHEEKATI MANAVENDRANATH ROY THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE TUHIN KUMAR GEDELA WRIT APPEAL NO: 86/2026 Writ Appeal under clause 15 of the Letters Patent be pleased to allow the Writ Appeal by setting aside the orders dated 29.12.2025 passed in WP. No. 34781 of 2025 and pass such Between: 1. ABBIREDDY BHAVANNARAYANA REDDY,, S/O. A. RAMA CHANDRA REDDY, AGED ABOUT 60 YEARS, OCC MANAGING PARTNER, SAUGANDHI SIVA RAMA HATCHERIES BEACH ROAD, KOTHA PERUMALLAPURAM, TONDAGNI MANDAL, KAKINADA DISTRICT - 533223. ...APPELLANT AND 1. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, REVENUE DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT, VELAGAPUDI, AMARAVATHI, GUNTUR DISTRICT - 522237. 2. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, HOME DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT, VELAGAPUDI, AMARAVATHI, GUNTUR DISTRICT - 522237. 3. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, KAKINADA, KAKINADA DISTRICT - 533001. 4. THE SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, KAKINADA, KAKINADA DISTRICT - 533001. 2 CMR,J & GTK,J W.A.No.86 of 2026 5. THE SPECIAL DEPUTY COLLECTOR, K.S.E.Z, KAKINADA, KAKINADA DISTRICT - 533001. 6. THE DISTRICT REGISTRAR, KAKINADA, KAKINADA DISTRICT - 533001. 7. THE SUBREGISTRAR, PITHAPURAM MANDAL, KAKINADA DISTRICT - 533450. 8. THE TAHSILDAR, TODANGI MANDAL, KAKINADA DISTRICT - 533408 . 9. ABBIREDDY APPARA RAO, S/O. A. RAMA CHANDRA REDDY, AGED ABOUT 64 YEARS, R/O. NAGULAPALLI, V. KOTHAPALLI MANDAL, KAKINADA DISTRICT - 518422. ...RESPONDENT(S): IA NO: 1 OF 2026 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 may be pleased to direct the respondent no. 3 and 4 to take action basing on the complaint by way of representation dated 01.09.2025, pending disposal of the Writ Appeal and pass such Counsel for the Appellant: 1. T N M RANGA RAO Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. GP FOR HOME 2. GP FOR REVENUE 3. GP FOR REGISTRATION AND STAMPS The Court made the following: 3 CMR,J & GTK,J W.A.No.86 of 2026 JUDGMENT: (Per Hon’ble Sri Justice Cheekati Manavendranath Roy) Aggrieved by the impugned order dated 29.12.2025 of the learned Single Judge passed in Writ Petition No.34781 of 2025 dismissing the writ petition, the instant writ appeal has been preferred by the appellant. 2. Heard Mr.T.N.M.Ranga Rao, learned counsel for the appellant, learned Government Pleader for Revenue for respondent Nos.1, 3, 5 and 8, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Home for respondent Nos.2 and 4 and learned Assistant Government Pleader for Stamps and Registration for respondent Nos.6 and 7. Since this writ appeal is being disposed of at the admission stage, notice to respondent No.9 is dispensed with. 3. The petitioner is claiming to be the owner of the land in question in an extent of Ac.0.22 cents in Survey No.343/1, Ac.0.84 cents in Survey No.343/2, Ac.1.51 cents in Survey No.343/3 of Konaavulamanda Village, Kotta Perumallapuram, Tondangi Mandal, Kakinada District. It is his grievance that the unofficial respondent has created a registered agreement of sale- cum-GPA in respect of his land. Therefore, it is stated that he has submitted a representation to the District Collector i.e., the 3rd respondent and to respondent Nos.4 to 8 to take action for cancellation of the said document and also to take criminal action against the unofficial respondent and that the said representation is not considered. Therefore, he has filed the writ petition to declare the inaction of the respondent Nos.3 and 4 in taking action on his representation as sought for and to direct the official respondents to take action on his representation. 4. The learned Single Judge, by the impugned order, declined to entertain the writ petition and dismissed the same on the ground that if registration of a document is effected fraudulently then the remedy of the petitioner is to initiate action under Sections 82 and 83 of the Registration Act, seeking prosecution of the erring person, and the petitioner did not resort to the said provisions. 4 CMR,J & GTK,J W.A.No.86 of 2026 5. We do not find any legal flaw in the impugned order of the learned Single Judge. If it is the grievance of the appellant that a fraudulent document was created and registered by the unofficial respondent in respect of his land, he has to take recourse to the remedy as contemplated under Sections 82 and 83 of the Act. He cannot simply submit representation to the official respondents herein and seek direction from the Court to take action on the said representation. In fact, he can also take legal action for cancellation of the said document and prosecute the erring persons for resorting to the said illegal act of creating fraudulent documents. 6. Therefore, the Writ Appeal is dismissed, confirming the order of the learned Single Judge, while granting liberty to the appellant to resort to Sections 82 and 83 of the Act and to other provisions of law according to law. There shall be no order as to costs. 7. As a sequel, Miscellaneous Applications pending, if any, shall stand closed. ________________________________________ CHEEKATI MANAVENDRANATH ROY, J _______________________ TUHIN KUMAR GEDELA, J Date : 03-02-2026 BMS