APHC010540332024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3206] FRIDAY,THE TWENTY THIRD DAY OF JANUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE R RAGHUNANDAN RAO WRIT PETITION NOs: 27976/2024 AND 34310/2017 In W.P.No.27976 of 2024: Between: 1. VUDA LAKSHMI PRASADA RAO, AGE 65YRS S/O LATE VENKANNA, R/O MULAGAMPALLI VILLAGE JEELUGUMILL MANDAL, ELURU DISTRICT ...PETITIONER AND 1. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP BY ITS PRI.SECRETARY, REVENUE DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT, VELAGAPUDI, AMARAVATI GUNTUR DISTRICT. 2. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, ELURU DISTRICT, ELURU 3. THE REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER, JANGAREDDYGUDEM DIVISION, JANGAREDDYGUDEM. 4. THE TAHSILDAR, JEELUGUMILLI MANDAL, JEELUGUMILLI. 5. NARAGANI POORNACHANDRA RAO, S/O LATE VENKATESWARA RAO, ROWTHUGUDEM, JEELUGUMILLI MANDAL, JEELUGUMILL, ELURU 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 order direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus in not taking action on the complaint made by the petitioner on 2 22/10/2024 for mutating the land records in R.S.No. 170/4 an extent of Ac.1.86Cents situated in Rowthugudem village, Jeelugumilli Mandal, Eluru District arbitrarily in the name Naragani Poornachandra Rao without following Sec 4 and Sec 5(3) of ROR, Act and consequently direct the respondents to take action on the complaint made on 22/10/2024 by mutating the name of the petitioner in revenue records for the land covered in R.S.No.170/4, an extent of Ac.1.86 Cents situated at Rowthugudem village, Jeelugumilli Mandal, Eluru District and to pass IA NO: 1 OF 2024 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 call for the entire records pertaining to mutation made in the name Naragani Poorna Chandra Rao for the land covered in R.S.No.170/4 an extent of Ac.1.86 cents situated in Rowthugudem village, Jeelugumilli Mandal, Eluru district pending disposal of the above writ petition and to pass Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. J RAVI KUMAR Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. GP FOR REVENUE In W.P.No. 34310/2017 Between: 1. NARAGANI PURNA CHANDRA RAO, S/O. NARAGANI VENKATESWARA RAO AGED 45 YEARS, OCC. AGRICULTURE R/O. ROUTHUGUDEM VILLAGE, JEELUGUMILLI MANDAL WEST GODAVARI DISTRICT ...PETITIONER AND 1. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, REVENUE DEPARTMENT SECRETARIAT, VELAGAPUDI, AMARAVATHI GUNTUR DISTRICT 2. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, WEST GODAVARI DISTRICT, ELURU 3 3. THE REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER, JANGAREDDYGUDEM, WEST GODAVARI DISTRICT 4. THE TAHSILDAR, JEELUGUMILLI MANDAL, WEST GODAVARI DISTRICT 5. VUDA LAKHSMIPRASADA RAO, AGE 65 YEARS, S/O LATE VENKANNA, R/O MULAGAMPALLI VILLAGE, JEELUGUMILLI MANDAL,ELURU DISTRICT. AGRICULTURE R/O. ROUTHUGUDEM VILLAGE, JEELUGUMILLI MANDAL WEST GODAVARI DISTRICT ...PETITIONER AND 1. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, REVENUE DEPARTMENT SECRETARIAT, VELAGAPUDI, AMARAVATHI GUNTUR DISTRICT 2. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, WEST GODAVARI DISTRICT, ELURU 3 3. THE REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER, JANGAREDDYGUDEM, WEST GODAVARI DISTRICT 4. THE TAHSILDAR, JEELUGUMILLI MANDAL, WEST GODAVARI DISTRICT 5. VUDA LAKHSMIPRASADA RAO, AGE 65 YEARS, S/O LATE VENKANNA, R/O MULAGAMPALLI VILLAGE, JEELUGUMILLI MANDAL,ELURU DISTRICT. R5 IS IMPLEADED AS PER THE COURT'S ORDER DT.26.12.2025 IN I.A.NO.01 OF 2025 ...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, Order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Mandamus, declaring the action of the respondents particularly 4th respondent in trying to dispossess the petitioner from his ancestral property admeasuring Ac.1.86 cents in Sy No. 170/4 situated at Routhugudem Village, Jeelugumilli Mandal, West Godavari District without following due process of law and is illegal, arbitrary and against the principles of natural justice and also without issuing any notice and also violatiive of Articles 14, 19, 21 and 300-A of Constitution of India and consequently direct the respondents not to dispossess the petitioner from his respectable agricultural lands without following due process of law in the interest of justice and to pass IA NO: 1 OF 2017(WVMP 5071 OF 2017 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 13.10.2017 in WPMP.No.42664 of 2017 in WP.No.34310 of 2017 and pass IA NO: 2 OF 2017(WPMP 42664 OF 2017 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 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 implead the petitioner herein as Respondent No.5 as necessary and proper party in the writ petition as the subject property on 4 which the petitioner approached this Hon'ble Court without any locus standi and by concealing the material facts which were known to him by praying this Hon'ble Court to restrain the respondents from dispossessing him from the land covered in R.S.No. 170/4 an extent of Ac. 1.86 Cents situated in Rowthugudem village, Jeelugumili Mandal, Eluru District and consequently dismiss the Writ Petition and pass Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. P V KRISHNAMACHARY Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. GP FOR REVENUE (AP) 5 The Court made the following COMMON ORDER: As these two writ petitions relate to the same dispute between the same parties, they are being disposed of this common order: 2. Heard Sri J.Ravi Kumar, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner in W.P.No.27976 of 2024 (respondent No.5 in W.P.No.34310 of 2017). There is no appearance for the petitioner in W.P.No.34310 of 2017 despite the fact that the writ petition was posted for dismissal today. Hence, these cases are being disposed of on the basis of the material before this Court. 3. The case of the petitioner, in W.P.No.27976 of 2024 is that an extent of Ac.4-72 cents of land has been purchased in Rowthugudem Village, Polavaram Taluka, Jeelugumilli Mandal, West Godavari District, by his father, in the year 1959, under two registered Deeds of Sale. After the demise of his father, the property devolved upon the petitioner and his brother. Various disputes were raised by the Government, on the ground that the said land falls in the Tribal areas and the rights of the petitioner and his brother are not clear. On account of the expenditure incurred in protecting the lands, the brother of the petitioner and another nephew Sri Naragani Poornachandra Rao (writ petitioner in W.P.No.34310 of 2017) are said to have been relinquished their rights over the property in a Gramasabha. However, after the petitioner had successful in protecting the land, Sri N.Poornachandra Rao, had managed to get his name incorporated in the revenue records as owner of the lands. The petitioner made inquiries as to how such an entry was made. The Tahsildar, in 6 reply to the application filed by the petitioner, under the Right to Information Act, had informed the petitioner that there was no application made by Sri N.Poornachandra Rao for mutation and it was not clear as to how the name of the Sri Poornachandra Rao had been included in the revenue records. The reply, to the application under Right to Information Act, had also stated that the said Sri Poornachandra Rao had also filed W.P.No.34310 of 2017 which was pending before the High Court. 4. In W.P.No.34310 of 2017, the case of Sri N.Poornachandra Rao is that there was a partition of the property between the family members on account of which Sri Poornachandra Rao became the owner and possessor of Ac.1- 86 cents of land in Sy.No.170/4 and the revenue authorities, more specifically the Tahsildar, was seeking to dispossess him from the said land without any proceedings and in violation of Law. 5. The petitioner in W.P.No.27976 of 2024 seeks a direction from this Court to the revenue authorities to consider the complaint of the petitioner, regarding irregular entry of Sri Poornachandra Rao in the revenue records. The case of the petitioner is that the name of the Sri Poornachandra Rao could not have bee entered without a proper application made and without following the procedure set out in the ROR Act, including the provisions of Section 5 of the ROR Act. 6. W.P.No.34310 of 2017 has been pending before this Court for the last 8 years while W.P.No.27976 of 2024 has been pending before this Court for the last 2 years. 7 7. In view of the fact that no counters appear to have been filed by the revenue authorities and in view of the fact that there is no appearance on behalf of Sri Poornachandra Rao, this Court is now compelled to pass an order on the basis of the material before this Court in the form of pleadings and the statements made by the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner in W.P.No.27976 of 2024. 8. The petitioner, in W.P.No.27976 of 2024, has made a specific statement that Sri N.Poornachandra Rao and the brother of the petitioner had relinquished their rights over the property to the petitioner, in a Gramasabha. Thus, there is an implicit admission that Sri Poornachandra Rao had some right or claim over the property. However, the petitioner contends that his claim has been given up. On the other hand, Sri Poornachandra Rao depends upon a partition under which he is said to have been given a share in the property. These are issues which cannot be gone into by this Court, especially in view of the fact that there is a paucity of material before this Court to take any view. However, the reply given by the Tahsildar to the application filed by the petitioner under the Right to Information Act would show that there are irregularities which require a closer inspection by the revenue authorities. 9. In the circumstances, these Writ Petitions are disposed of in the following manner: i) The respondent No.2 – District Collector, in W.P.No.27976 of 2024, shall initiate action under Section 9 of the ROR Act to ascertain the correctness of the revenue entries made in the 8 revenue records and on the question of how and when entries were made in favour of Sri N.Poornachandra Rao; ii) For the purpose of this inquiry, the District Collector shall issue notices to both the petitioner in W.P.No.27976 of 2024 and N.Poornachandra Rao in W.P.No.34310 of 2017; iii) The District Collector after giving an opportunity of hearing and an opportunity to place necessary material before him to both the parties, shall take a decision on the correct entries that should have been available in the revenue records and pass directions to ensure that entries are made in the revenue records; iv) The District Collector shall complete the said exercise within six (6) months from the date of receipt of this order. v) There shall be no order as to costs. As a sequel, pending miscellaneous applications, if any, shall stand closed. ________________________ R. RAGHUNANDAN RAO, J Date: 23.01.2026 KA 9 THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE R RAGHUNANDAN RAO WRIT PETITION NOs: 27976/2024 AND 34310/2017