Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Andhra Pradesh · body

2026 DAILYLAW 24238 (AP)

B. Gurunatha Reddy v. The State of Andhra Pradesh

WP/29332/2021 · 2026-02-16

Kiranmayee Mandava

body2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

APHC010485842021 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3458] TUESDAY,THE SEVENTEENTH DAY OF FEBRUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE KIRANMAYEE MANDAVA WRIT PETITION NO: 29332/2021 Between: 1. B. GURUNATHA REDDY,, S/O B. KRISHNAVASU REDDY, AGED ABOUT 42 YEARS,OCC- CULTIVATION, R/O H. NO. 1-33, PAGIDIRAI VILLAGE, THUGGALIMANDAL, KURNOOL DISTRICT. 2. B. MAHESWAR REDDY,, S/O B. KRISHNAVASU REDDY, AGED ABOUT 38 YEARS,OCC- CULTIVATION, R/O H. NO. 1-33, PAGIDIRAI VILLAGE, THUGGALIMANDAL, KURNOOL DISTRICT. ...PETITIONER(S) AND 1. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP BY IT'S PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, REVENUE DEPARTMENT SECRETARIAT, VELAGAPUDI, AMARAVATHI. 2. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, KURNOOL DISTRICT. 3. THE JOINT COLLECTORREVENUE, KURNOOL DISTRICT. 4. THE REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER, ADONI DIVISION, KURNOOL DISTRICT. 5. THE MANDALTAHSILDAR, YEMMIGANURMANDAL, KURNOOL DISTRICT 6. MR B MOHAN REDDY, S/O B. PARAMESWARA REDDY, AGED ABOUT 39 YEARS, OCC- CULTIVATION, R/O H. NO. 4-133, RAMPALLI VILLAGE, THUGGALIMANDAL, KURNOOL DISTRICT. 2 KM, J W.P.29332 of 2021 7. SMT KAMESWARAMMA, W/O LATE B. PARAMESWAR REDDY, HOUSE HOLD, R/O R/O H. NO. 4-133, RAMPALLI VILLAGE, THUGGALIMANDAL, KURNOOL 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 to issue a Writ, Direction Order or Orders more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the 4th and 5threspondents in entertaining the application of the 6th respondent and passing the impugned orderin R.c.e.616/2019, dt. 08.10.2021 passed by the 4th respondent and consequential mutations effected by the 5th respondent on the name of 7th respondent in respect of the land an extent of Ac.1.50 cts. InSy. No. 399 of Gudikal village accounts, YemmiganurMandal as illegal, arbitrary, without power or authority or jurisdiction, contrary to the provisions of A.P. Rights in Land and Pattadar Pass Books Act apart from violation of principles of natural justice by setting aside the same and consequentially direct the 4th and 5th respondents to restore the entries made in respect of the land to an extent of Ac.3.00 in Sy. No. 399 of Gudikal village, YemmiganurMandal on the names of the petitioners including in the web-land b) direct the respondents not to entertain any claim of the respondent Nos.6and7 for mutations for the said land in the interest of Justice and pass 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 impugned order in R.C.e. 616/2019 dt. 08-10-2019 passed by the 4th respondent and consequential implementation of the said order in respect of the land an extent of Ac. 3.00 in sq. no. 399 of gudikal village, yemmiganur mandal, kurnool district, pending disposal of the writ petition in the interest of justice and 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 to vacate the interim order granted on 05-01-2022 in IA 1/2021 in WP. 29332/2021 IA NO: 1 OF 2023 3 KM, J W.P.29332 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 receive the Reply copies on record by allowing the leave petition in the above writ petition and pass Counsel for the Petitioner(S): 1. A CHANDRAIH NAIDU Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. M KARIBASAIAH 2. GP FOR REVENUE 3. NIMMAGADDA REVATHI The Court made the following Order: Heard Sri A. Chandraih Naidu, learned counsel for the petitioners and learned Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue appearing for the respondents. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the issue raised in the present writ petition does not survive and no further adjudication is necessary, having regard to the fact that subsequent to the filing of the writ petition, the respondents have set aside the mutations effected in the name of the unofficial respondents and the names of the writ petitioners have been restored and the same was also mentioned in the online records. 3. Smt. Nimmagadda Revathi, learned counsel for unofficial respondents submits that a Civil Suit is also filed and the same is pending. 4 KM, J W.P.29332 of 2021 4. In view of the foregoing, the Writ Petition is disposed of as no further orders are required to be passed. There shall be no order as to costs. As a sequel, miscellaneous applications pending, if any, shall stand closed. ______________________________ JUSTICE KIRANMAYEE MANDAVA Date: 17.02.2026 PBS 39 5 KM, J W.P.29332 of 2021 207 THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE KIRANMAYEE MANDAVA WRIT PETITION NO: 29332 OF 2021 Date: 17.02.2026 PBS