Orders Reserved on : 12.03.2026. Orders Pronounced on : 15.06.2026. Orders Uploaded on : 16.06.2026. APHC010441562019 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3209] MONDAY, THE FIFTEENTH DAY OF JUNE TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE NINALA JAYASURYA I.A. No. 1 OF 2022 IN WRIT PETITION NO: 21323 OF 2019 AND C.C.No.293 of 2022 Between: 1. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP., BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, REVENUE DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIATE BUILDINGS, VELAGAPUDI, AMARAVATHI, GUNTUR DISTRICT. 2. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, CHITTOOR DISTRICT, CHITTOOR. 3. THE REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER, MADANAPALLE DIVISION, MADANAPALLE, CHITTOOR DISTRICT. 4. THE THASILDAR, PILER MANDAL, CHITTOOR DISTRICT. 5. THE DISTRICT COOPERATIVE CENTRAL BANK, REP., ITS MANAGER, CHITTOOR, CHITTOOR DITSTRICT. 6. THE SUBREGISTRAR, PILER, CHITTOOR DISTRICT. ...PETITIONER AND 1. P S SHAFIULLA, , S/O.GHOUSE MODIN, AGED ABOUTTEARS, OCC. AGRICULTURE, LK/O. 14-33, POKANATI VEEDHI, B- KOTHAKOTA VILLLAGE AND MANDAL, CHITTOOR DISTRICT ...RESPONDENT(S): Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. Mr.K.Arjun Chowdary, Asst.Govt.Pleader for Review Petitioners 2. Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. Mr.V.R.Reddy Kovuri, Advocate for Respondent. 2 This Court made the following COMMON ORDER: Seeking review of the order dated 16.12.2020 in W.P.No.21323 of 2019, State filed the present application. 2) Respondent / writ petitioner filed the said writ petition on 26.12.2019, seeking the following relief: “…..to issue an appropriate order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the respondent Nos. 2 and 3 in including the land in an extent of Ac 2.62 Cents in Sy.No.782/4 and Ac.2.38 Cents in Sy.No.783/3 of Yerraguntlapalle Village fields, Piler Mandal, Chittoor District in the prohibitory lands list furnished under Section 22-A (1) (b) of the Registration Act, 1908 and the consequential action of the respondent No.6 in refusing to entertain the sale deed for registration for the same stating that the same is included prohibitory lands list as Government land as arbitrary, illegal and quite contrary to the well established legal principles laid in the case of the Sub-Registrar, Srikalahsti, Chittoor District Vs. K. Guraviah reported in 2009(2) ALD 250 apart from being violative of fundamental and Constitutional rights guaranteed to the petitioner under Articles 14, 19, 21 and 300-A of the Constitution of India and consequently direct the respondent No.6 to entertain the sale deeds for registration for the land in an extent of Ac 2.62 Cents in Sy.No.782/4 and Ac.2.38 Cents in Sy.No.783/3 of Yerraguntlapalle Village fields, Piler Mandal, Chittoor District, and register the same by setting aside the prohibitory lands list furnished by the respondent No.2 under Section 22-A (1) (a) of the Registration Act, 1908 in so for as it relates to the land belong to the petitioner.” 3) It came up for admission on 03.01.2020 and adjourned to 20.01.2020. Thereafter on 07.08.2020, the matter was adjourned for filing counters. Learned Judge of this court by an order dated 16.12.2020 disposed of the Writ Petition. 3 4) Alleging non-implementation of the said order, respondent / writ petitioner filed C.C.No.293 of 2022 on 01.02.2022. Thereafter, the present review petition was filed on 14.06.2022. 5) Mr.K.Arjun Chowdary, learned Assistant Government Pleader made submissions to impress upon the Court that the order dated 16.12.2020 suffers from error apparent on the face of the record and therefore the same is liable to be reviewed. It is his main contention that the Writ Petition was disposed of during Covid Pandemic and as such the review petitioners herein had no opportunity to file a counter affidavit by setting out the factual aspects of the case. He submits that under a bona fide impression that the issue was covered by a decision in K. Guravaiah’s case disposal of the Writ Petition was agreed to. However, facts of the present case are not similar to K. Guravaiah’s case and it transpired that fraud was played with reference to the subject matter land which was purchased by respondent / writ petitioner’s vendor in an auction stated to have been conducted by PACS (Primary Agricultural Cooperative Society), Piler. He submits that as stated in ground No.7, E.P.No.128/2006-07 belongs to Kannemadugu PACS, but not Piler PACS and material filed along with Review Petition would substantiate the plea that fraud had been played. 6) Learned Assistant Government Pleader further submits that in respect of very same subject matter property of Ac.5-00 cents in Sy.No.782/4 and 783/3, with reference to which above mentioned writ petition was filed, one Mr.Md. Rafi Ansari filed W.P.No.24817 of 2020, 4 which came to be disposed of by an order dated 25.01.2021 and seeking implementation of the same, C.C.No.122 of 2022 was filed. He submits that in view of the orders in two Writ Petitions i.e., W.P.No.21323 of 2019 and W.P.No.24817 of 2020, in respect of very same land, implementation of anyone of the order will result in violation of the other order. Making the said submissions and drawing attention of this Court to various documents, he seeks to allow Review Petition and to dismiss Contempt Case, as there is no wilful disobedience of the orders dated 16.12.2020. 7) On the other hand, Mr. V.R.Reddy Kovvuri, learned counsel for respondent / writ petitioner argued the matter at length by refuting the contentions advanced on behalf of the review petitioners. Referring to various averments in the affidavit filed in support of W.P.No.21323 of 2019 and earlier round of litigation in respect of very same subject land of an extent of Ac.2-62 cents in Sy.No.782/4 and Ac.2-38 cents in Sy.No.783/3 of Yerraguntlapalli village fields he submits that writ petitioner as long back in the year 2010 filed W.P.No.32865 of 2010 and the same was disposed of by an order dated 28.12.2010, while noting the contention that the said extent of land sold in favour of the petitioner’s vendor by 4th respondent Bank therein was assigned to one of the loanees, but in turn had mortgaged it in favour of the Bank. He submits that as the order in the said Writ Petition was not implemented, C.C.No.1328 of 2011 was filed and thereafter, Tahsildar, Piler / Review Petitioner No.4 herein, issued Pattadar 5 Passbooks in respect of the above said extent of land by mutating the name of writ petitioner in the revenue records. 8) Learned counsel further submits that as the authorities concerned were not entertaining sale deeds for registration of the subject land, writ petitioner was constrained to file W.P.No.21323 of 2019 and the learned Judge had rightly allowed it in the light of settled legal position. He also submits that only with a view to avoid Contempt proceedings, present Review Petition has been filed, that there are no merits in the same. He accordingly seeks dismissal of the Review Petition. 9) This Court has considered submissions made by both parties and perused material on record. 10) At the outset, it may be appropriate to mention that Writ Petition No.21323 of 2019 was filed prior to the Covid Pandemic 2019 and it is not as if the matter was disposed of at the threshold, that too without giving opportunity to the respondents therein. As noted earlier, on 07.08.2020 case was adjourned for filing counter. Thereafter, on 26.08.2020 the matter was adjourned at the request of the learned Government Pleader for getting instructions. On 31.08.2020, at the request of the learned Government Pleader time was granted for filing counter and the matter was directed to be listed on 04.09.2020. The matter was further adjourned to 10.09.2020 and docket proceedings dated 04.09.2020 reads as follows: “The learned Government Pleader says that the counter is prepared and he will file the same next week. 6 He is directed to serve the copy on the learned counsel for the petitioner by 09.09.2020.” 11) Subsequently, the matter was disposed of by order dated 16.12.2020, the relevant potion of which reads as follows: “When the matter is taken up today, it is brought to the notice of this court by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the issue in this writ petition is squarely covered by the ratio laid down by the Division bench of erstwhile High Court of Andhra Pradesh in a case of Sub-Registrar, Srikalahasti, Chittoor District and Another Vs. K.Guravaiah and another1 and also order dated 04.12.2020 passed by this Court in Writ Petition No.22928 of 2020, wherein this Court disposed of the matter by following the ratio laid down in K.Guravaiah’s case (1 supra). The learned Assistant Government Pleader for Stamps & Registration has not disputed the same. In view of the same, for the reasons alike in the aforesaid order, this writ petition is also disposed of in terms of the aforesaid order. There shall be no order as to costs.” 12) In the light of the above stated position, the submission made on behalf of the Review petitioners to the effect that writ petition was disposed of without adequate opportunity, that too for filing counter, merits no appreciation. In fact, it is a case where no counter affidavit was filed, even after granting time. 13) So far as, the ground raised with reference to the auction of subject matter land purportedly in E.P.No.128/06-07 which is not related to Piler PACS etc., and the alleged fraud by Cooperative authorities to convert valuable Government land into private land under the guise of auction, the 1 2009 (2) ALD 250 (DB) 7 same deserves no consideration for more than two reasons. Firstly, writ petitioner’s claim over the subject matter property was with reference to public auction in favour of his vendor was already considered in W.P.No.32865 of 2010. Concerned revenue authorities were party respondents in the said Writ Petition and no plea with regard to the alleged fraud in respect of the auction conducted in the year 2007 was raised. Even in the present Review Petition, nothing is stated as to when the alleged fraud came to light. Secondly, the stand of revenue authorities that the land was assigned and its transfer is prohibited under Section 3 of The Andhra Pradesh Assigned Lands (Prohibition of Transfers) Act, 1977 was virtually answered against them and the relevant portion of the order dated 28.12.2010 reads as follows: “It is not in dispute that the land that was sold in favour of the vendor of the petitioner by the bank was assigned to one of the loanee, in turn, had mortgaged it in favour of the bank. On account of non- payment of the borrowed amount, the bank has put the land to sale and the vendor of the petitioner emerged as the highest bidder. The question as to whether the prohibition contained under Section 3 of the Act operates vis-à-vis the lands, that are sold by a bank for recovery of loan on the strength of mortgage, was dealt with by this Court in W.P.Nos.14743 and 14750 of 2007. Through a common judgment, dated 26.07.2007, it was held that the prohibition contained under the Act does not apply to the mortgages or other similar transactions in favour of cooperative societies or scheduled banks and thereby, Section 3 of the act becomes inoperative vis-à- vis such transactions. A Writ Appeal filed against the said judgment is said to have been dismissed. Therefore, following the judgment of this Court in W.P.Nos.14743 and 14750 of 2007, dated 26.07.2007, this writ petition is allowed 8 and the 3rd respondent is directed to consider the application of the petitioner for issuance of pattadar passbook and title deeds and take necessary action, without taking any plea with reference to the provisions of the Act. There shall be no order as to costs.” It is not in dispute that the above stated order dated 28.12.2010 had attained finality and ultimately implemented after filing of Contempt Case. It is also not the case of the review petitioners that the alleged fraud was played by the respondent / writ petitioner, either. Hence, the contentions with reference to the alleged fraud are rejected. 14) This Court is also not impressed with the argument made by learned Assistant Government Pleader with reference to orders in W.P.No.24817 of 2020. The said Writ Petition was filed on 22.12.2020 i.e., subsequent to disposal of the subject matter Writ Petition No.21323 of 2019 vide order dated 16.12.2020. As verified from the case status details W.P.No.24817 of 2020 was disposed of by an order dated 25.01.2021 and nothing prevented the review petitioners, who were impleaded as party respondents in the said Writ Petition about the orders dated 16.12.2020 in W.P.No.21323 of 2019, and earlier W.P.No.32865 of 2010, which is in respect of the same subject matter property. Further, as seen from the order in W.P.No.24817 of 2020 dated 25.01.2021, the claim of writ petitioner therein appears to be on the basis of an ex parte decree in respect of the land situated in Sy.No.782/4, 783/3 of Yerraguntlapalli Village, which is purportedly assigned to P.S.Shafiulla (respondent / writ petitioner herein) and purchased by one Shaik Afzal in a public auction 9 conducted by the District Cooperative Central Bank, Chittoor. It appears that seeking review of the order in W.P.No.24817 of 2020, State filed Review Petition. Be that as it may. 15) It is well settled position in law that an order can be reviewed only in the event error apparent on the face of the record. Power of review can be exercised for correction of mistake. In the case on hand, no such mistake which is attributable to the Court was committed. 16) In S.Murali Sundaram Vs. Jothibai Kannan and others2, the Apex Court held that even if the judgment sought to be reviewed is erroneous, the same cannot be a ground to review in exercise of powers Under Order 47 Rule 1 of Code of Civil Procedure. 17) In the light of the aforesaid discussion, this Court see no error apparent on the face of the record warranting review of the Order dated 16.12.2020. Therefore, Review I.A. is dismissed. No costs. C.C.No.293 of 2022 18) In view of the dismissal of Review Petition, the order dated 16.12.2020 has to be implemented. Therefore, the Contempt Case is disposed of granting two months time for implementation of the orders passed in W.P.No.21323 of 2019 and filing compliance report. NINALA JAYASURYA, J Date:15.06.2026. Ssv 2 (2023) 13 SCC 515 10 HONOURABLE Mr. JUSTICE NINALA JAYASURYA Rev.IA No.1 OF 2022 In W.P.No.21323 OF 2019 And C.C.No.293 of 2022 Date:15.06.2026. Ssv