APHC010130912021 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3458] FRIDAY, THE THIRTEENTH DAY OF MARCH TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE KIRANMAYEE MANDAVA WRIT PETITION NO: 7522/2021 Between: 1. ALLU NARASINGA RAO, S/O LATE DALEPPADU, AGED- 60 YEARS, OCC- CULTIVATION, 2. ALLU APPA RAO, S/O LATE DALEPPADU, AGED- 56 YEARS, OCC- CULTIVATION, 3. ALLU SURYANARAYANA,, S/O LATE NARASAYYA, AGED- 58 YEARS, OCC- CULTIVATION, 4. ALLU LAKSHMANA RAO, , S/O LATE DALEPPADU, AGED- 47 YEARS, OCC- CULTIVATION, ALL THE PETITIONERS ARE R/O RAMAJOGIPETA VILLAGE, DHARMAVARAM GRAM PANCHAYAT, ETCHERLA MANDAL, SRIKAKULAM DISTRICT. ...PETITIONER(S) AND 1. STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, REVENUE DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT, VELAGAPUDI, AMARAVATI, GUNTUR DISTRICT. 2. DISTRICT COLLECTOR, SRIKAKULAM DISTRICT. 3. REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER, SRIKAKULAM DIVISION, SRIKAKULAM DISTRICT. 4. TAHSILDAR, ETCHERLA MANDAL, SRIKAKULAM DISTRICT. 5. SRI SRI RAMACHANDRA MURTHY SWAMY TEMPLE, REP. BY ITS PRIVATE MANAGING TRUSTEE, JALLA LAXMANA RAO, S/O 2 LATE APPAIAH, AGED ABOUT 46 YEARS, OCC. CULTIVATION, R/O BANNA STREET, DOOR NO. 104, DHARMAVARAM VILLAGE, ETCHERLA MANDAL, SRIKAKULAM DISTRICT - 532408. 6. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER, ENDOWMENTS DEPARTMENT, PALAKONDA ROAD, SRIKAKULAM, NEAR KRISHNA PARK, SRIKAKULAM TOWN, SRIKAKULAM DISTRICT - 532001. RR 5 TO 6 ARE IMPLEADED AS PER THE COURT ORDER DATED 12.08.2025 IN I.A.NO.03 OF 2022. ...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 to It is therefore Humbly prayed that this Honble Court may be pleased to issue a writ order to direction more particularly one in the nature of WRIT OF MANDAMUS declaring the Endorsement in Rc.No.43 2021 dt.19.03.2021 issued by 4th respondent thereby mutated the petitioners agricultural lands covered by Survey Nos. 443 11a admeasuring Ac. 0.49 cents and 44311c admeasuring Ac. 1.78 cents situated in Ramajogipeta Village H o Dharmavaram Revenue Village,Etcherla Mandal Srikakulam District from the online web land revenue records in the name of Sri Sri Sriramachandra Murthy Swamy Temple situate at Dharmavaram Village by deleting the petitioners names from online web land revenue records without issuing individual notices to the petitioners under Section 5 3 of A.P.Rights in Land and Pattadar passbooks Act 1971 and rules framed there under, without conducting enquiry, without examining the material evidence available on records and without considering the petitioners objections dt. 19032021 submitted to the publications dt. 19032021 submitted to the publications dt. 04032021 issued in Form 8 under Rule 19 1 of Andhra Pradesh Rights in Land and Pattadar passbooks Rules 1989 as illegal,arbitraty,violative of principles of natural justice violative of provisions of Andhra Pradesh Rights in Land Pattadar Passbooks Act1971 and rules framed there under and offends Articles 14 21 and 300A of the Constitution of India and set aside the Endorsement dt.19.03.2021 and mutation undertaken in favour of Sri Sriramachandra Murthy Swamy Temple situated at Dharmavaram Village with respect to petitioners said lands as illegal and consequently to suspend the 4th Respondent Endorsement in Rc.No.432021 dt 19.03.2021 and direct the respondent No4 to maintain status quo ante with respect to petitioners agricultural lands in Survey Nos. 44311a admeasuring Ac 0.49 cents and 44311c admeasuring Ac. 1.78 cents situated in Ramajogipeta Village Ho Dharamavaram Revenue Village Etcherla Mandal 3 Srikakulam District and not to dispossess the petitioners from their lands and to pass such other order or orders as this Honble Court may deem fit and proper in the circumstance of the case. Prayer is amended substituted as per C.O.dt. 12092022 in I.A.No.12022 IA NO: 1 OF 2021 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 suspend the operation of mutation made on 19-03-2021 in favour of 'Sri Sriramachandra Murthy Swamy Temple' situated at Dharmavaram Village with respect to petitioners' said lands covered by Survey Nos. 443-11a and 443- 11c situated in Ramajogipeta Village, Dharmavaram Revenue Village, Etcherla Mandal, Srikakulam District and consequently direct respondents to maintain entire record of rights including Pattadar Passbooks and Title Deeds in favour of petitioners for their respective agricultural lands covered by Survey Nos. 443-11a and 443-11c pending disposal of the above writ petition and to pass IA NO: 1 OF 2022 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 declaring the Endorsement in Rc.No.43/2021, dt. 19.03.2021 issued by 4th respondent thereby mutated the petitioners' agricultural lands covered by Survey Nos. 443-1 la admeasuring Ac. 0.49 cents and 443-11c admeasuring Ac. 1.78 cents situated in Ramajogipeta Village H/o Dharmavaram Revenue Village, Etcherla Mandal, Srikakulam District from the online web land revenue records in the name of 'Sri Sri Sriramachandra Murthy Swamy Temple' situated at Dharmavaram Village by deleting the petitioners' names from online web land revenue records without issuing individual notices to the petitioners under Section 5(3) of A.P. Rights in Land and Pattadar Passbooks Act, 1971 and rules framed there under, without conducting enquiry, without examining the material evidence available on records and without considering the petitioners' objections dt. 19-03-2021 submitted to the Publications dt. 04- 03-2021 issued in Form-8 under Rule 19(1) of Andhra Pradesh Rights in Land and Pattadar Passbooks Rules 1989 as illegal, arbitrary, violative of principles of natural justice, violative of provisions of Andhra Pradesh Rights in Land and Pattadar Passbooks Act, 1971 and rules framed there under and offends Articles 14, 21 & 300-A of the Constitution of India and set aside the Endorsement dt. 19.03.2021 and mutation undertaken in favour of 'Sri Sriramachandra Murthy Swamy Temple' situated at Dharmavaram Village with 4 respect to petitioners' said lands as illegal and consequently to suspend the 4th Respondent Endorsement in Rc.No.43/2021, dt. 19.03.2021 and direct the respondent No: 4 to maintain status quo ante with respect to petitioners' agricultural lands in Survey Nos. 443-1 la admeasuring Ac. 0.49 cents and 443-11c admeasuring Ac. 1.78 cents situated in Ramajogipeta Village Hr o Dharmavaram Revenue Village, Etcherla Mandal, Srikakulam District and not to dispossess the petitioners from their lands and to pass IA NO: 2 OF 2022 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 suspend the 4th Respondent Endorsement in Rc.No.43/2021, dt. 19.03.2021 and direct the respondent No: 4 to maintain status quo ante with respect to petitioners' agricultural lands in Survey Nos. 443- 1 la admeasuring Ac. 0.49 cents and 443-11c admeasuring Ac. 1.78 cents situated in Ramajogipeta Village H/o Dharmavaram Revenue Village, Etcherla Mandal, Srikakulam District and not to dispossess the petitioners from their lands and IA NO: 3 OF 2022 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 pleased to permit the proposed respondents 5 and 6 to be impleaded as parties/respondents 5 and 6 in Writ Petition No.7522 of 2021 and also pending miscellaneous petitions therein, in the interest of justice and pass Counsel for the Petitioner(S): 1. SRINIVAS AMBATI Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. GP FOR REVENUE 2. GP FOR ENDOWMENTS 5 THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE KIRANMAYEE MANDAVA WRIT PETITION NO: 7522/2021 The Court made the following Order: Heard Sri Srinivas Ambati, learned counsel for the petitioners, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue and learned Assistant Government Pleader for Endowments appearing for the respondents. 2. The grievance of the petitioners in the instant Writ Petition is against the action of the respondent No.4 – Tahsildar in mutating the name of the Temple, the respondent No.5 herein, in the Revenue records. 3. It is contended that the petitioners are the absolute owners, possessors and enjoyers of the subject agricultural lands in Sy.Nos.443-11a and 443-11c in Ramajogipeta Village, Dharmavaram Revenue Village, Etcherla Mandal, Srikakulam District, having acquired title to the same through inheritance. In recognition of their possession and occupation, the Revenue Department has also mutated the petitioners' names in the revenue records, and, consequently, pattadar passbooks and title deeds were issued in their favour. However, a notice in Form-8 under Rule 19(1) of the Andhra Pradesh Rights in Land and Pattadar Passbooks Rules, 1989 was published in the Grama Panchayat's Notice Board proposing to mutate the name of the respondent No.5 in the revenue records in place of the writ petitioners' names. It is stated that all the petitioners have filed their respective objections in response to the said notice. However, without considering the said objections, the respondents have mutated the respondent No.5 Temple as 6 Pattadar. Being aggrieved by the said proceedings of the Tahsildar, the present Writ Petition is filed. 4. The principal argument of the learned counsel for the petitioners is that the impugned proceedings are in violation of the principles of natural justice and are contrary to the provisions of the Andhra Pradesh Rights in Land and Pattadar Passbooks Rules, 1989, having regard to the fact that the respondents have not issued notice to the petitioners before effecting the mutation in favour of the 5th respondent. However responding to the notice that was published in the Notice Board of the Grama Panchayat, the petitioners have submitted their objections on 19-03-2021. Without considering any of those objections or giving any opportunity, the impugned proceedings have been passed. 5. Learned Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue on the basis of the written instructions which are placed before the Court, would submit that the petitioners have responded to the notice issued and participated in the enquiry filed copies of the Adangals, but they have failed to produce the documentary evidence in support of their contention, evidencing the transfer in their favour. Thus the impugned proceedings have rightly been passed. It is further stated that an enquiry was conducted in the said regard, the said enquiry revealed that the petitioners are only the ‘Cowldars’ and they are not the owners of the subject lands, as such the impugned proceedings were issued in favour of the respondent No.5. 7 6. Considered the submissions. 7. For consideration of the issue raised in the instant Writ Petition, it is relevant to refer to the provisions of Section 5 of The AP Rights in Land and Pattadar Pass Books Act, 1971 reads as under: “5.(1) On receipt of intimation of the fact of acquisition of any right referred to in section 4, the Tahsildar shall determine as to whether, and if so in what manner, the record of rights may be amended in consequence thereof and shall carry out the amendment in the record of rights in accordance with such determination: Provided that no order refusing to make an amendment in accordance with the intimation shall be passed unless the person making such intimation has been given an opportunity of making his representation in that behalf. (2). - - - - (3) The recording authority shall, before carrying out any amendment in the record of rights under sub-section (1) or sub-section (2) issue a notice in writing to all persons whose names are entered in the record of rights and who are interested in or affected by the amendment and to any other persons whom he has reason to believe to be interested therein or affected thereby to show cause within the period specified therein as to why the amendment should not be carried out. A copy of the amendment and the notice aforesaid shall also be published in such manner as may be prescribed. The recording authority shall consider every objection made in that behalf and after making such enquiry as may be prescribed pass such order in relation thereto as he deems fit. (4). - - - - (5). - - - - 8 And Rule 5 of the Andhra Pradesh Rights in Land and Pattadar Passbooks Rules, 1989, particularly Rule 5(2) of the Rules which reads as follows: “Rule 5(2). The notice referred to in sub-rule (1) shall be in Form-II and shall be published in the District Gazette of the District in which the village is situate and also in the following manner namely. (a) by affixture in the chavidi or if there is no chavidi, in any other conspicuous place of the village. (b) by affixture on the notice boards of the Gram Panchayat Office Primary Co-operative Agricultural Credit Society or School, if any in the village. (c) by beat of tom in the village; (d) by affixture on the notice board of the office of the Mandal Revenue Officer having jurisdiction over the village; and (e) by affixture on the notice board of the office of the Mandal Praja Parishad in which the village is situated.” 8. A perusal of the above provisions would reflect that the notice in writing to all the persons whose names are entered in the record of rights and who are interested in or affected by the amendment, and to any other persons whom the recording authority has reason to believe to be interested therein or affected thereby, to show cause, is required to be issued before any amendment is carried out. Apart from the same, the publication of the said notice in the manner as specified under Rule 5 of the Rules is mandatory. In view of the same, in the instant case, no notices have been issued to the petitioners individually. Based on the notice published at the Notice Board of the Gram Panchayat, the petitioners filed their objections, but they were not 9 considered. In view of the same, mutation of the name of the respondent No.5 Temple is without following the procedure is in violation of the provisions of the Act and also is in violation of natural justice. 9. It is to be further observed that a Full Bench of this court in the case of Chinnam Pandurangam V. Mandal Revenue Officer1 had held that, it is mandatory to issue notice under Rule 5(2) of the Act to all the individual persons whose names have already existed in the record. Having regard to the same, admittedly, in the instant case, no individual notices have been issued to the petitioners, having regard to the same, the impugned endorsement is set aside and the matter is remanded to the Tahsildar – respondent No.4 for passing appropriate orders, after giving notice to the petitioners and after giving opportunity of hearing to both the petitioners and the unofficial respondent Nos.5 & 6. Needless to observe that, during the pendency of the said proceedings, none of the parties to the Writ Petition shall create third party interest in respect of the subject property. 10. With the above observation, the Writ Petition is disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs. As a sequel, all pending miscellaneous applications shall stand closed. ______________________________ JUSTICE KIRANMAYEE MANDAVA Dated: 13.03.2026 MSI 1 (2007) 6 ALD 348, (2007) 6 ALT 134 10 THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE KIRANMAYEE MANDAVA WRIT PETITION NO: 7522/2021 Dated: 13.03.2026 MSI