APHC010375992025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3233] WEDNESDAY,THE ELEVENTH DAY OF FEBRUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE B KRISHNA MOHAN WRIT PETITION NO: 19411/2025 Between: 1. B VENKATA SUBBA REDDY, S/O. B.SUBBA RAYUDU REDDY, AGED 44 YEARS, OCC EX.ARMY, R/O. KALAVAPALLI VILLAGE, GOPAVARAM MANDAL, YSR KADAPA DISTRICT. ...PETITIONER AND 1. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, REVENUE DEPARTMENT, A.P. SECRETARIAT VELAGAPUDI, GUNTUR DISTRICT. 2. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, PRAKASAM DISTRICT, ONGOLE. 3. THE REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER, MARKAPURAM, PRAKASAM DISTRICT. 4. THE TAHSILDAR, MARKAPURAM MANDAL PRAKASAM DISTRICT. ...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 tomay be pleased to issue any writ or direction more particularly a writ in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the order passed by the 4th respondent in Procgs.Special Register.No./MT/4 86/2025 dt.26.05.2025 in rejecting the application of petitioner for mutating his name in revenue records with respect to the land admeasuring Ac.4.17 Cents in Sy.No.35/2 of Narasimhapuram Village, Markapuram Mandal, Prakasam District, without having jurisdiction, without issuing any notice, without conducting enquiry as 2 BKM,J W.P.No.19411 of 2025 contemplated under the A.P Rights in Land and Pattadar Passbooks Act, 1971, as illegal, arbitrary, violative of Principles of Natural Justice, Articles 14, 21 and 300 A of the Constitution of India, Consequently set-aside the same and direct the respondents herein to mutate the name of petitioner in revenue records with respect to the land admeasuring Ac.4.17 Cents in Sy.No.35/2 of Narasimhapuram Village, Markapuram Mandal, Prakasam District, also to direct the 1st respondent to initiate disciplinary action and departmental enquiry against the 4th respondent and to pass such IA NO: 1 OF 2025 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 set-aside the order passed by the 4th respondent in Procgs.Special Register.No./MT/486/2025 dt.26.05.2025, by directing the respondents herein to mutate the name of petitioner in revenue records with respect to the land admeasuring Ac.4.17 Cents in Sy.No.35/2 of Narasimhapuram Village, Markapuram Mandal, Prakasam District, also to direct the 1st respondent to initiate disciplinary action and departmental enquiry against the 4th respondent, pending disposal of the above writ petition and to pass such Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. V VINOD K REDDY Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. GP FOR REVENUE 3 BKM,J W.P.No.19411 of 2025 The Court made the following Order: Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue appearing for the respondents. 2. This writ petition is filed questioning the order issued by the 4th respondent dated 26.05.2025 rejecting the mutation application filed by the petitioner dated 29.04.2025. 3. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner was not given any opportunity to submit in person and the Tahsildar has not conducted any enquiry pursuant to the Form-8 notice issued dated 29.04.2025 except by relying upon the report said to have been submitted by the Village Revenue Officer which is not even reflected the details of the same in the impugned order of the 4th respondent dated 26.05.2025. But the same was rejected assigning the few reasons as detailed in the said impugned order of the 4th respondent dated 26.05.2025. 4. On the other hand, the learned Assistant Government Pleader appearing for the respondents submits that pursuant to the mutation application filed by the petitioner dated 29.04.2025, the 4th respondent issued Form-8 notice dated 29.04.2025, which was fixed at appropriate places as required under the Rules and basing upon the report of the Village Revenue Officer, the final order was passed assigning the reasons dated 26.05.2025, which is assailed in this writ petition. 4 BKM,J W.P.No.19411 of 2025 5. In view of the above said facts and circumstances, as the impugned order dated 26.05.2025 does not indicate any enquiry conducted by the 4th respondent and participation of the petitioner in the said enquiry and as it is also touching upon the merits of the case of the petitioner while rejecting the mutation application dated 29.04.2024. Ex facie it shows that the said impugned order dated 26.05.2025 is not in compliance with the requirements principles of natural justice, it is liable to be set aside, giving the petitioner liberty to file fresh mutation application, enclosing all the necessary documents in support of his claim before the 4th respondent, following the due procedure within a period of four (04) weeks from the date of receipt of this order. On receipt of such mutation application afresh from the petitioner duly, the 4th respondent shall consider and dispose of the same, strictly in accordance with law, by hearing all the parties concerned, including the petitioner, giving due opportunity, upon verification of the records and the subject land, appropriate decision shall be taken on its own merits as expeditiously as possible preferably within a period of three (03) months thereafter. Uninfluenced by the earlier order of the 4th respondent dated 26.05.2025 fresh orders shall be passed by the 4th respondent as directed above. 6. Accordingly, this Writ Petition is disposed of. Interim order if any deemed to have been vacated. There shall be no order as to costs. 5 BKM,J W.P.No.19411 of 2025 As a sequel, Interlocutory Applications pending, if any, shall stand closed. __________________________ JUSTICE B. KRISHNA MOHAN 11.02.2026 PGT