APHC010229632022 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3458] WEDNESDAY, THE EIGHTEENTH DAY OF FEBRUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE KIRANMAYEE MANDAVA WRIT PETITION NO: 13520 OF 2022 Between: 1. GAJULA PRASAD, S/O GAJULA CHINNA BASAPPA, AGED ABOUT 57 YEARS, OCCUPATION AGRICULTURIST AND BANGLE PROFESSION, RESIDENT OF YERIGERI VILLAGE, KOWTHALAM MANDAL, KURNOOL DISTRICT, A.P. ...PETITIONER AND 1. STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REPRESENTED BY THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, REVENUE DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT, VELAGAPUDI-522 237(A.P.), GUNTUR DISTRICT, A.P. 2. DISTRICT COLLECTOR, KURNOOL DISTRICT, KURN000L-518 001(A.P.) 3. REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER, ADONI-518 301(A.P.), KURNOOL DISTRICT. 4. TAHSILDAR, KOWTHALAM MANDAL, KOWTHALAM-518 344(A.P.), KURNOOL DISTRICT. 5. STATION HOUSE OFFICER, KOWTHALAM MANDAL KOWTHALAM- 518 344(A.P.), KURNOOL DISTRICT. 6. GAJULA BHAGIRATHAMMA, W/O LATE GAJULA PEDDA BASAPPA AGED ABOUT 69 YEARS, OCCUPATION . HOUSE WIFE, RESIDENT OF H. NO. 10-7-17, MALKHALPETA, RAICHUR-584 101, KARNATAKA STATE. ...RESPONDENT(S): 2 Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. VIVEKANANDA VIRUPAKSHA Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. GP FOR HOME 2. GP FOR REVENUE 3. B R S KALYAN REDDY The Court made the following order: Heard Sri Vivekananda Virupaksha, learned counsel for the petitioner, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue appearing for the respondent Nos.1 to 4 and Sri B.R.S.Kalyan Reddy, learned counsel for respondent No.6. 2. The grievance of the petitioner is against respondent No.4 in not passing orders on the application dated 12.04.2022 filed by the petitioner for mutating his name in the revenue records and for issuance of Pattadar Pass Book and Title Deed. It is contended that at the behest of respondent No.6, respondent No. 4 is refusing to consider and pass orders on the application of the petitioner. 3. The petitioner's case is that he acquired title to the subject lands through gift settlement deed bearing document No.59 of 1990 in an extent of Ac.5.40 cents in Sy.No.530-1, Ac. 2.49 cents in Sy.No.519-1, Ac.2.13 cents in Sy.No.530-3, and Ac.1.16 cents in Sy.No.519-3, total Ac.11.18 cents situated at Yerigeri Village, Kowthalam Mandal, Kurnool District. These lands were 3 purchased by the petitioner’s father in 1953 vide registered sale deed Document No.181/1953 dated 09.02.1953. 4. It is contended that the respondent No.6, who had already sold his share, of a land has tried to grab the petitioner’s land by creating fictitious pattadar pass books and also filed a civil suit in O.S.No.171 of 2011 on the file of the Senior Civil Judge, Adoni for permanent injunction. 5. It is stated that the suit in O.S.No.171 of 2011 filed by respondent No.6 was dismissed on 27.02.2019. Despite dismissal of the said suit, the respondents have not acted upon the petitioner’s application for mutation. The petitioner approached the respondents for correction of names in the revenue records and for issuance of pattadar pass books on 11.04.2022. 6. It is further stated that a fresh representation dated 11.04.2022 was submitted by the petitioner requesting the revenue authorities to pass appropriate orders on the earlier application. And that he also filed Form 6A through Mee Seva on 12.04.2022. However, no orders have been passed by the revenue authorities. 7. It is stated on behalf of the respondents that the petitioner is not in possession of the subject property. However, pursuant to the representation of the petitioner, the Tahsildar issued proceedings dated 18.04.2022 and submitted a report dated 25.09.2021 to the Revenue Divisional Officer for deletion/cancellation of Pattadar Pass Book and Title Deed issued in favour of the respondent No.6. The petitioner was informed that issuance of Pattadar 4 Pass Book and Title Deed would be after obtaining appropriate orders from the Revenue Divisional Officer. 8. It is contended that since the date of the said proceedings, no further orders have been passed. Thus, the instant writ petition is filed. 9. Learned counsel for the 6th respondent would contend that the petitioner has filed another case before the Tahsildar against the 6th respondent. 10. Having regard to the contentions advanced as no orders have been passed since 2022 on the application of the petititioner, this Court is of the view that, in the interests of justice, it is deemed appropriate to issue a direction to the 4th respondent to pass appropriate orders on the applications dated 12.04.2022 and 11.04.2022 filed by the petitioner, after giving due opportunity of hearing to the petitioner as well as the 6th respondent, within a period of six months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. 11. With the above observation, the Writ Petition is disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs. As a sequel, miscellaneous applications pending, if any, shall stand closed. _______________________________ JUSTICE KIRANMAYEE MANDAVA Date: 18.02.2026 BSK 5 82 THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE KIRANMAYEE MANDAVA WRIT PETITION NO: 13520 OF 2022 Date: 18.02.2026 BSK