APHC010265082026 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH Monday, the Fifteenth The Honourable Writ Petition Between: Bayyapuneni Balakotaiah R/o. Kallempalli village, Marripudi Mandal, Prakasam District. a n d 1. The State of Andhra Pradesh rep. by its Principal Secretary (Revenue Department), Amaravati 2. The District Collector, Ongole, Prakasam District 3. The Revenue Divisional Officer, Kandukur, Prakasam District. 4. The Tahsildar, Marripudi Ma District. Counsel for the petitioner: 1. Md. Saleem Counsel for the respondent 1. G.P. for Revenue The Court made the following: IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) Fifteenth day of June Two Thousand and Twenty Six Present The Honourable Ms. Justice B. S. Bhanumathi Writ Petition No. 14392 of 2026 Bayyapuneni Balakotaiah, S/o. Venkayya, Aged: 80 years, Kallempalli village, Marripudi Mandal, Prakasam District. …. Petitioner The State of Andhra Pradesh rep. by its Principal Secretary (Revenue Department), Amaravati. The District Collector, Ongole, Prakasam District. The Revenue Divisional Officer, Kandukur, The Tahsildar, Marripudi Mandal, Prakasam … Respondents etitioner: espondents: for Revenue The Court made the following: IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3311] day of June Two Thousand and Twenty Six Bhanumathi Kallempalli village, Marripudi Mandal, Prakasam District. Petitioner … Respondents 2 BSB, J W.P.No.14392 of 2026 ORDER: This writ petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking the following relief: “…to issue Writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of writ of mandamus declaring the inaction of the respondents, more particularly, the respondent No.4 herein in not mutating the name of the petitioner in the revenue records as per his written request, dated 26.07.2025, is illegal, arbitrary and contrary to the well– established legal principles and violative of Articles 14, 19, 21 of the Constitution of India and to pass such other order or orders as the Court may deem fit and proper in the circumstances of the case.” 2. The case of the petitioner, briefly stated, is as follows: The petitioner purchased an agricultural land in R. S. No. 164/1 for an extent of Ac. 1.11 cents in Kellampalli village, Marripudi Mandal, Kandukur Revenue Division, Prakasam District, through a registered sale deed, vide document No.102/2002 on the file of the S.R.O., Podili of Prakasam district and from then onwards, the petitioner has been in peaceful possession and enjoyment without any interruption. The petitioner requested the revenue authorities for mutation of the schedule property in the revenue records in his name. However, the respondents did not take any action. Hence, this writ petition. 3. The learned Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue placed on record a copy of the written instructions vide Rc. DT/92/2026, dated 15.06.2026. The relevant portion of the written instructions read as follows: 3 BSB, J W.P.No.14392 of 2026 “It is submitted that it is not possible to mutate the name of petitioner in the web land based on a plain representation. It is submitted that the petitioner herein has not filed Mutation for transaction application through online electronically from Ward / Village Secretariat in Form VI(a) in terms of Rule 18(1) sub rule (2) of the A.P. Rights in Land and Pattadar Pass Books Rules, 1989 as amended vide G.O.Ms. No.271, Revenue (EA & AR) Department, dated 01.07.2016 for carrying changes in online web land adangal of Kellampalli village, Marripudi Mandal and he simply filed application / representation which cannot be processed in accordance with law. It is submitted that if at all, the petitioner herein files online mutation of transaction application in Form VI as stated supra along with documentary evidences proving his rights and possession over the claiming land, the said application will be processed duly following the procedure enacted under the A.P. Rights in Lands & pattadar Pass Books Act, 1971 & Rules 1989 as amended therein.” 4. Keeping in view the above instructions, the learned counsel for the petitioner represented by Ms. T. Jyothi, learned counsel, requested to dispose of the writ petition giving the petitioner liberty to follow the procedure online. 5. Accordingly, the Writ Petition is disposed of giving liberty to the petitioner to submit application afresh in proper form through online as indicated in the written instructions as noted above. 4 BSB, J W.P.No.14392 of 2026 There shall be no order as to costs. Pending miscellaneous petitions, if any, shall stand closed. ___________________ B. S. BHANUMATHI, J Dt.15.06.2026 RAR