APHC010600142025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3233] THURSDAY, THE TWENTY SECOND DAY OF JANUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE B KRISHNA MOHAN WRIT PETITION NO: 34169/2025 Between: 1. GUVVALA CHINNA SUBBARAO, S/O. VENKATA SUBBAIAH R/O. PADARTHI VILLAGE,KOTHAPATNAM MANDAL, PRAKASAM DISTRICT. A.P.STATE. ADHARNO. 5717 4565 2557 ...PETITIONER AND 1. THE STATE OF AP, REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, REVENUE DEPARTMENT, 4TH BLOCK, GROUND FLOOR, ROOM NO 135, A.P SECRETARIAT OFFICE, VELAGAPUDI, AMARAVATHI, GUNTUR DISTRICT, ANDHRA PRADESH. 2. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, ONGOLE MANDAL. PRAKASAM DISTRICT A.P. STATE. 3. REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER, ONGOLE MANDAL. PRAKASAM DISTRICT A.P. STATE. 4. THETAHSILDARM R O, KOTHAPATNAM, KOTHAPATNAM MANDAL, PRAKASAM DISTRICT. 5. YALLAGALA HARI BABU, S/O. AUDEIAH,PADARTHI VILLAGE, KOTHAPATNAM MANDAL, PRAKASARM DISTRICT.A.P. ...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 2 may be pleased topleased to issue writ or more particularly writ of mandamus to declare the act of Tahsildar cancellation of patta of the petitioner and declare it as the government land, without conducting grama sabha, without commencing tom tom in the village, for the sake of avoid villagers belong to all the communities and receiving the statements of few villagers who belong to the community of respondent- 5, and rejected the statements of villagers who come forward for giving statement in favour of the petitioner, which violates the right of the petitioner under article 14, article 21, and article 300A of constitution of India consequently direct the respondent-4 to resume the land to the petitioner and mutate the same in the name of the petitioner, to direct the Respondent to pronounce the order in accordance with law with regard to RC No.850/2025 with immediate effect, and also grant Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. V ANJANEYA RAJU Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. GP FOR REVENUE 3 The Court made the following Order: No representation for the petitioner. Heard the learned Assistant Government Pleader for the respondent Nos.1 to 4. 2. This writ petition was filed questioning the action of the Tahsildar cancelling the patta of the petitioner declaring it as the government land without conducting grama sabha and without commencing tom tom in the village, for the sake to avoid villagers belonging to all the communities and receiving the statements of few villagers who belong to the community of the 5th respondent and rejected the statements of villagers who come forward for giving statements in favour of the petitioner. 3. On the other hand, the learned Assistant Government Pleader relying upon the written instructions of the 3rd respondent dated 18.12.2025 submits that the appellate authority/ the 3rd respondent delivered the order dated 12.12.2025 upholding the order of the Tahsildar, Kothapatnam passed in Rc.No.B/88/2024, dated 12.06.2024. The petitioner has been informed that the revision petition lies within 60 days before the Joint Collector, Prakasam, if aggrieved by the order of the 3rd respondent under sub-section (1) of the Section 4 of the A.P. Assigned Lands (Prohibition of Transfers) Act, 1977. 4. In view of the same, as per the said instructions of the 3rd respondent dated 18.12.2025 no cause survives in this writ petition. The 4 written instructions of the 3rd respondent shall be made as part of the court record. 5. Accordingly, the writ petition is dismissed as infructuous. Interim order, if any, deemed to have been vacated. There shall be no order as to costs. As a sequel, Miscellaneous Petitions pending, if any, shall stand closed. _________________________ JUSTICE B KRISHNA MOHAN 22.01.2026 NNN