Date of reserved for orders : Date of pronouncement : 30.06.2026 Date of uploading : APHC010169542018 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3333] TUESDAY, THE 30th DAY OF JUNE 2026 PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE V.SUJATHA WRIT PETITION NO: 7428/2018 Between: 1. CHERUKURI PEDDA VENKATA SUBBAIAH,, S/O. NADUPU PEDDA VENKATA SUBBAIAH, AGED ABOUT 62 YEARS, OCC. AGRICULTURE, R/O.RAJUPETA VILLAGE, B.MATTAM MANDAL, Y.S.R. DISTRICT ...PETITIONER AND 1. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE, SECRETARIAT BUILDINGS, VELAGAPUDI, GUNTUR DISTRICT. 2. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, Y.S.R.DISTRICT, KADAPA. 3. THE TAHSILDAR, B.MATTAM MANDAL, Y.S.R.DISTRICT. 4. RALLAPATI HUSSAIN, S/O.PEERSAHEB, AGED ABOUT 35 YEARS, OCC. AGRICULTURE, R/O.RAJUPETA VILLAGE, B.MATTAM MANDAL, Y.S.R.DISTRICT. 5. RALLAPATI PEERIAH, S/O.PEERSAHEB, AGED ABOUT 38 YEARS, OCC. AGRICULTURE, R/O.RAJUPETA VILLAGE, B.MATTAM 2 VS,J W.P.No.7428 of 2018 MANDAL, Y.S.R.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 to issue a writ, order or direction more particularly one in nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the respondent No.3 in interfering with petitioners rights over the land in an extent of Ac.0.49 1/2 Cents in Sy.No.431 and Ac.0.83 Cents in Sy.No.430/6 of Nagisetty Palli Village, B.Mattam Mandal, Y.S.R.District at the instance of the respondents No.4 and 5 and also in mutation of the revenue records in petitoenr favour for the land in an extent of Ac.0.49 1/2 Cents in Sy.No.431 and Ac.0.83 Cents in Sy.No.430/6 of Nagisetty Palli Village, B.Mattam Mandal, Y.S.R.District on the ground that the Digital signature to the said land is not done by the respondent No.3 as arbitrary, illegal, colorable exercise of power, contrary to the procedure contemplated under the provisions of the AP Rights in Land and Pattadar Pass Books Act, 1971 and the AP Rights in Land and Pattadar Pass Books Rules, 1989 and violative of the fundamental rights guaranteed to petitioner under Articles 14 and 21 of the Constitution of India and consequently direct the respondent No.3 to mutate the revenue records including the online entries for the land in an extent of Ac.0.49 1/2 Cents in Sy.No.431 and Ac.0.83 Cents in Sy.No.430/6 of Nagisetty Palli Village, B.Mattam Mandal, Y.S.R.District in petitioner favour and pass IA NO: 1 OF 2018 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 direct the respondent No.3 not to interfere with petitioner rights over the land in an for the land in an extent of Ac.0.49 1/2 Cents in Sy.No.431 and Ac.0.83 Cents in Sy.No.430/6 of Nagisetty Palli Village, B.Mattam Mandal, Y.S.R.Distric, pending disposal of the above Writ Petition and pass IA NO: 1 OF 2026 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 grant leave to receive and take on record the accompanying Counter Affidavit in W.P. No. 7428 of 2018, and pass 3 VS,J W.P.No.7428 of 2018 Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. P V N KIRAN KUMAR Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. GP FOR REVENUE (AP) 2. MUJTAHID HUSSAIN The Court made the following: 4 VS,J W.P.No.7428 of 2018 ORDER: This Writ Petition came to be filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, seeking the following prayer: “…to to issue a writ, order or direction more particularly one in nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the respondent No.3 in interfering with petitioners rights over the land in an extent of Ac.0.49 1/2 Cents in Sy.No.431 and Ac.0.83 Cents in Sy.No.430/6 of Nagisetty Palli Village, B.Mattam Mandal, Y.S.R.District at the instance of the respondents No.4 and 5 and also in mutation of the revenue records in petitoenr favour for the land in an extent of Ac.0.49 1/2 Cents in Sy.No.431 and Ac.0.83 Cents in Sy.No.430/6 of Nagisetty Palli Village, B.Mattam Mandal, Y.S.R.District on the ground that the Digital signature to the said land is not done by the respondent No.3 as arbitrary, illegal, colorable exercise of power, contrary to the procedure contemplated under the provisions of the AP Rights in Land and Pattadar Pass Books Act, 1971 and the AP Rights in Land and Pattadar Pass Books Rules, 1989 and violative of the fundamental rights guaranteed to petitioner under Articles 14 and 21 of the Constitution of India and consequently direct the respondent No.3 to mutate the revenue records including the online entries for the land in an extent of Ac.0.49 1/2 Cents in Sy.No.431 and Ac.0.83 Cents in Sy.No.430/6 of Nagisetty Palli Village, B.Mattam Mandal, Y.S.R.District in petitioner favour and pass…” 2. The case of the petitioner is that the land admeasuring Acs.0.49½ cents in Sy.No.431 and Acs.0.83 cents in Sy.No.430/6 of Nagisetty Palli village, B. Mattam mandal, Y.S.R. Kadapa district was 5 VS,J W.P.No.7428 of 2018 purchased by his grandfather by name Cherukuri Seshaiah by way of a registered sale deed dated 14.11.1945 and ever since, the petitioner and his ancestors have been in possession and enjoyment of the subject land. The name of petitioner‟s grandfather was also mutated in the revenue records. 3. After the death of petitioner‟s grandfather, the properties devolved upon his three sons; as disputes arose, the said three sons approached the Court of Junior Civil Judge, Badvel by filing O.S.No.137 of 2016 seeking partition of the subject property; however, due to intervention of elders, all the parties have compromised before the Lok Adalath; an award was passed on 18.11.2017, in terms of which, the subject property fell into the share of the petitioner. Thereafter, when the petitioner approached the 3rd respondent with a request to mutate his name in the revenue records pertaining to the subject land, the same was not considered, as such, petitioner got issued a legal notice on 25.01.2018 in spite of which, as no action was initiated, the petitioner applied for mutation in Mee Seva, which was denied on the ground that the 3rd respondent has not approved the same. 4. The grievance of the petitioner is that, at the instance of respondent Nos.4 and 5, the respondent No.3 is trying to interfere with the peaceful possession and enjoyment of the petitioner over the subject property. Hence, the present writ petition is filed. 6 VS,J W.P.No.7428 of 2018 5. The respondent Nos.4 and 5 filed a detailed counter denying the averments of the petitioner and contended that the lands in Sy.Nos.430 and 431 of Rajupeta village, Dirasavancha gram panchayat, B. Mattam mandal, YSR Kadapa district are developed residential lands and that nearly 100 houses were constructed under Indiramma housing scheme during 2006-2007. Even prior to the said constructions, few residents used to reside in huts in the said land uninterruptedly since 1985 and in recognition of such long standing possession, the residents were allotted “Nivesana Sthala Swadheena Dhruvakaranam Patram” during 2000-2006, vide G.O.Ms.No.546, Revenue (ASN-I) department, dated 30.06.1997, jointly by the Mandal Revenue Officer, B. Mattam mandal and the panchayat Secretary, Dirasavancha gram panchayat. 6. It is further stated in the counter affidavit that the petitioner is solely relying on the Lok Adalath award dated 18.11.2017 passed in O.S.No.137 of 2016, without producing any independent or contemporaneous documentary evidence such as title deeds, tax receipts or possession certificate, to substantiate his right over the subject land. As such, sought dismissal of the present writ petition. 7. Heard Sri. P.V.N. Kiran Kumar, learned counsel for the petitioner, Sri. M. Hussain, learned counsel for respondent Nos.4 and 5 and learned Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue. 7 VS,J W.P.No.7428 of 2018 8. Perused the entire material available on record. The facts of the writ petition are not in dispute. During the course of arguments, it is brought to the notice of this Court by learned counsel for respondent Nos.4 and 5 that pending the present petition, the petitioner has filed O.S.No.213 of 2018 on the file of the Court of the Junior Civil Judge, Badvel seeking declaration of title over the subject land, which is pending adjudication. Learned Assistant Government Pleader has also furnished a copy of letter addressed by the 3rd respondent dated 30.06.2026 wherein it is stated that the subject lands covered in Sy.Nos.430/6 and 431 admeasuring Acs.0.83 cents and Acs.0.4950 cents respectively are classified as under as per the RSR of Nagishettypalli revenue village: Sl.No. Sy.No. Classification 16th column 1 430/6 Acs.8.32 cents G D Dukekula Hussain Sab Patta land as per RSR 2 431 Acs.1.98 cents G D Dukekula Hussain Sab Patta Land as per RSR 9. It is evident from the material available on record that the subject lands, claimed by the petitioner are developed residential lands and the residents were allotted „Nivesalsthala Swadheena 8 VS,J W.P.No.7428 of 2018 Dhruvakaranam Patram‟ during the period 2000-2006 recognizing the long standing possession of the resident over the subject land in accordance with G.O.Ms.No.546, Revenue (ASN-I) department, dated 30.06.1997. The said facts clearly establish that the question of interference by the respondent authorities at the instance of respondent Nos.4 and 5 does not arise, as the respondent Nos.4 and 5 have been in possession over the subject lands even prior to the allotting “Nivesana Sthala Swadheena Dhruvakaranam Patram”. 10. In view of the above, this Court does not find any merit in the present writ petition and the same is liable to be dismissed. However, as the petitioner has already approached the jurisdictional Civil Court seeking declaration of title of the subject property in his favour, in the year 2018 and as the same is still pending adjudication, the petitioner is at liberty to pursue the same. 11. Accordingly, this writ petition is dismissed. There shall be no order as to costs. Consequently, Miscellaneous Petitions, if any, pending in this Petition shall stand closed. _____________________ JUSTICE V.SUJATHA 30.06.2026 Gss 9 VS,J W.P.No.7428 of 2018 Whether the order is : Speaking Yes/No / Recorded Yes/No Reportable Yes/No / Non-Reportable Yes/No