APHC010098102026 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3209] FRIDAY, THE TWENTY SEVENTH DAY OF FEBRUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE NINALA JAYASURYA WRIT PETITION NO: 5516/2026 Between: 1. EPURI VENU @ DANIEL,, S/O EPURI YESURATHNAM, R/O. MANDADAM VILLAGE, THULLUR MANDAL, GUNTUR DISTRICT, ANDHRA PRADESH. 522237 ...PETITIONER AND 1. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF MUNICIPAL ADMINISTRATION AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT, SECRETARIAT BUILDINGS, VELAGAPUDI VILLAGE, AMARAVATHI.522237 2. THE ANDHRA PRADESH CAPITAL REGION DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY, REP BY ITS COMMISSIONER, APCRDA PROJECT OFFICE, RAYAPUDI POST, TULLURU MANDAL, AMARAVATI, GUNTUR DISTRICT, ANDHRA PRADESH 522 237. 3. THE DEPUTY COLLECTOR CUM AUTHORIZED OFFICER, (LAND ACQUISITION), CRDA, UNIT -I, KRISHNAIAHAPALEM, GUNTUR DISTRICT.522502 4. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE, SECRETARIAT BUILDINGS, VELAGAPUDI VILLAGE, AMARAVATHI.522237 5. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, GUNTUR DISTRICT, GUNTUR.522001 6. THE TAHSILDAR, MANGALAGIRI MANDAL, GUNTUR NJS,J W.P No.5516 of 2026 2 DISTRICT.522302 7. UNNAM DAAVEDU, , S/O MOSHE, RVO. KRISHNAIAHPALEM VILLAGE, MANGALAGIRI MANDAL, GUNTUR DISTRICT. 522502 ...RESPONDENT(S): Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. VMR LEGAL Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. GP FOR MUNCIPAL ADMN URBAN DEV 2. GP FOR REVENUE 3. S PRANATHI NJS,J W.P No.5516 of 2026 3 The Court made the following Order: Heard learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. K N Krishna Kumar, learned Assistant Government Pleader representing the respondent No.1, Mr. Abhishek Malik, learned counsel representing the respondent Nos.2 and 3, Mr. T Sanjeeva Rao, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue representing the respondent Nos.4 to 6. 2. The petitioner claims that his grand-father one Mr. Gaddam Nageswara Rao, purchased an extent of Ac.0.70 cents in Survey No.127/1 of Krishnayapalem Village through a registered sale deed dated 01.06.1981. The said property was devolved on him by virtue of a Will dated 14.11.2007, after the death of his grand-father on 30.12.2009, he is in possession and enjoyment of the said property. However, the respondent No.7 got mutated his name in the revenue records behind the back of the petitioner and in this regard, the petitioner made representations to the concerned authorities i.e., respondent No.6. He contends that the mutation in favour of the respondent No.7 is contrary to the procedure laid down in Andhra Pradesh Rights in Land and Pattadar Pass Books Act, 1971 and rules made thereunder. 3. Referring to the above stated position, the learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the CRDA Authorities are proposing/proceeding to issue Form 9.14 (Development agreement – cum – Irrevocable General power of Attorney) in favour of the respondent No.7 in respect of an extent of Ac.0.71 cents in Survey No.127/1 of Krishnayapalem Village and if the same is allowed, the rights of petitioner over the same/subject matter land would be affected and therefore, the petitioner is constrained to approach this Court seeking appropriate reliefs. 4. On the other hand, Mr. Abhishek Malik, learned counsel representing the learned Standing Counsel for CRDA, placed a copy of the written instructions dated 26.02.2026 received from the Special Deputy Collector (i/c), Unit-1, Krishnayapalem for perusal of the Court. While submitting that the NJS,J W.P No.5516 of 2026 4 petitioner has not made any representation to the CRDA authorities so far, the learned counsel would submit that no material is filed in the present writ petition supporting the claim of the petitioner for an extent of Ac.0.71 cents, except an un-registered Will dated 14.11.2007. He further submits that on the basis of the revenue records and after verification of the other material, the authorities concerned are proceeding in the matter. 4. He submits that prior to issuance of Form 9.14, consent in Form 9.3 will be taken as contemplated under Andhra Pradesh Capital City Land Pooling Scheme (Formation and Implementation) Rules, 2015, that so far, Form 9.14 has not been issued in favour of the respondent No.7 and authorities concerned after following the due procedure would take further action in the matter. 5. In the light of the said submissions, this Court instead of keeping the writ petition pending and inviting counter, deems it appropriate to dispose of the same, leaving it open to the petitioner to make appropriate representation along with the supporting documents to the respondent No.3 with regard to his claim in respect of the subject matter property within a period of one week, from the date of receipt of copy of this order. The said authority prior to issuing/granting Form 9.14, shall consider the same, in accordance with the Rules, pass appropriate orders and communicate it to the petitioner. 6. With the above directions, this Writ Petition is disposed of. No costs. Miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shall stand closed. __________________________ JUSTICE NINALA JAYASURYA Date:27.02.2026 Ksj