Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Andhra Pradesh · body

2026 DAILYLAW 5237 (AP)

T.Srinivasulu v. The State of Andhra Pradesh

WP/17146/2026 · 2026-07-12

B S Bhanumathi

body2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

Date of reserved for orders : Date of pronouncement : Date of uploading APHC010326822026 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH Monday, the thirteenth The Honourable Writ Petition Between: T. Srinivasulu, S/o. Soggadu, Aged 32 years, R/o Colony, Indira Nagar Panchayat, Varadaiahpalem district. and 1. The State of Andhra Pradesh Revenue Department, A.P. 2. The District Collector, Tirupati 3. The Revenue Divisional Officer, Sullurpet, Tirupati 4. The Tahsildar, Varadaiahpalem 5. Smt. Sujatha, W/o. late Soggadu, R/o Indira Colony, Varadaiahpalem Date of reserved for orders : N.A. Date of pronouncement : 13.07.2026 Date of uploading : 16.07.2026 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) the thirteenth day of July two thousand and twenty six Present The Honourable Ms. Justice B. S. Bhanumathi Writ Petition No.17146 of 2026 Srinivasulu, S/o. Soggadu, Aged 32 years, R/o. D. No.1-117, Indira Colony, Indira Nagar Panchayat, Varadaiahpalem mandal, Tirupati f Andhra Pradesh, rep. by its Principal Secretary, Department, A.P. Secretariat, Velagapudi, Guntur. The District Collector, Tirupati district, Tirupati. The Revenue Divisional Officer, Sullurpet, Tirupati district. The Tahsildar, Varadaiahpalem mandal, Tirupati district. Smt. Sujatha, W/o. late Soggadu, R/o. D. Varadaiahpalem mandal, Tirupati district. ….Resp IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH [3311] day of July two thousand and twenty six Bhanumathi 117, Indira , Tirupati …Petitioner , rep. by its Principal Secretary, Secretariat, Velagapudi, Guntur. istrict. istrict. D. No.1-117, istrict. ….Respondents 2 BSB, J W.P.No.17146 of 2026 Counsel for the petitioner: 1. V. Vinod K Reddy Counsel for the respondents: 1. G.P. for Revenue 2. Bulla Sambasiva Rao The Court made the following: 3 BSB, J W.P.No.17146 of 2026 ORDER: This writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India is filed seeking the following relief: “..to issue a writ or order or direction, more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus, declaring the action of the respondents Nos. 2 to 4 in not mutating the name of the petitioner in revenue records with respect to the land admeasuring Ac.0.87 ½ cents in Sy.No.303/1B of C.L.N. Palli village, Varadaiahpalem mandal, Tirupati district, despite the representation, dated 04.06.2026, as illegal, arbitrary, violative of Articles 14, 21 & 300-A of the Constitution of India, and consequently direct the respondents Nos. 2 to 4 herein to mutate the name of the petitioner in revenue record with respect to the subject land by considering the representation, dated 04.06.2026, and pass such other order or orders as this Court may deem fit and proper in the circumstances of the case.” 2. The case of the petitioner, briefly stated, is as follows: a. The grandfather of the petitioner, late Sri T. Gangaiah, had four sons, namely, Sri T. Venkatesh (elder son), Sri T. Soggadu (second son), Sri T. Polaiah (third son), Sri T. Mogilaiah (fourth son) and five daughters. The biological father of the petitioner, T. Venkatesh, passed away when the petitioner was three months old. Thereafter, at the age of seven (7) years, he was adopted by his paternal uncle, T.Soggadu, as he was issueless at that time. Several years after the adoption, his adoptive father was blessed with two daughters, namely, Nandini and Indu. His father was issued a D.K.T. patta by the respondent No. 4 4 BSB, J W.P.No.17146 of 2026 assigning the land of an extent of Ac. 2.75 cents in Sy. No. 303/1 of C.L.N. Palli village, Varadaiahpalem mandal, Tirupati district. The name of his adoptive father was mutated in the revenue records, viz., 1-B and Adangal. He was issued pattadar passbook and title deed with respect to the subject land. Soon thereafter, his adoptive father invested a significant amount out of his savings for clearing bushes and trees and made the subject land fit for cultivation. He passed away on 03.03.2016 leaving behind him his wife and daughters and the petitioner. b. The petitioner was married on 19.03.2017. Thereafter, the petitioner, his sisters and his mother partitioned the land of Ac. 2.75 cents in Sy. No. 303/1 of C.L.N. Palli village, Varadaiahpalem mandal, Tirupati district, as per which the petitioner and his mother got an extent of Ac.0.87 ½ cents each and his sisters got an extent of Ac.0.50 cents each. The names of the sisters of the petitioner were mutated in the revenue records; however, the name of the petitioner was not mutated in respect of the portion of land allotted to him. c. While the things stood thus, to the surprise of the petitioner, the name of the mother of the petitioner, i.e., respondent No.5, was mutated in the revenue records in respect of Ac.1.75 cents in Sy. No. 303/1B by the respondent No.4, without issuing any notice and without calling for explanation, violating the procedure under Section 5 of the Andhra Pradesh Rights in Land and Pattadar Pass Books Act, 1971. d. In the above circumstances, the petitioner submitted a representation, dated 04.06.2026, to the respondents Nos. 2 to 4 seeking mutation of his name in the revenue records and to issue pattadar passbook and title deed in respect of the land admeasuring Ac. 0.87 ½ cents in Sy. No.303/1B of C.L.N.Palli village. The respondent No.5, taking advantage of the mutation of her name, is 5 BSB, J W.P.No.17146 of 2026 trying to alienate the entire extent of land, including the share of the petitioner, if she succeeds in her attempt, the petitioner would be put to irreparable loss and hardship. As no action has been taken till date on his representation by the respondents, the petitioner was constrained to file this writ petition. 3. The learned Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue placed on record a copy of the written instructions of the respondent No.4, Tahsildar, Varadaiahpalem mandal, Tirupati District, vide Roc. No. A / 70 / 2026, dated 13.07.2026, wherein it was stated as follows: “…In this connection, it is submitted that, the land in Sy.No.303/1 to an extent of Ac.2.75 cents is originally splitted from the Block Sy.No.40, total extent Ac.110.20 cents of C.L.N. Palli village. The land in Sy.No.40, total extent Ac.110.20 cents is classified as “Grazing Ground” poramboke of C.L.N. Palli village. As seen per webland, the details of the land in Sy. No.303/1, C.L.N. Palli village, Varadaiahpalem mandal are as follows: Sy. No. Extent in acres Khata Number Name of the Pattadar & Enjoyer 303/1 1.75 857 Thupakula Sujatha W/o. late Soggadu 303/1A 0.50 801 T. Nandini D/o. Soggadu 303/1B 0.50 802 T.Indu D/o. Soggadu Since, the applied land is already mutated in the name of the others, ROR enquiry is must for taking necessary action. In this connection, the Revenue Divisional Officer, Sullurpet and Appellate Authority, R.O.R. has taken the representation of the writ petitioner as ROR appeal. An enquiry notice under R.O.R. Act issued to both writ 6 BSB, J W.P.No.17146 of 2026 petitioner and Webland Adangal Pattadars for the land in Sy.No.303/1, 303/1A & 303/1B of C.L.N. Palli in capacity of R.O.R. Appellate Authority vide this office Ref. No.B4/796/2026, dated 30.06.2026 calling both parties to appear before the Appellate Authority with connected title documents pertaining to the land in Sy.No.303/1 of C.L.N. Palli village, Varadaiahpalem mandal on 10.07.2026 at 11 A.M. for conducting R.O.R. enquiry. Hearing also conducted by the Appellate authority on the said date. Soon after competition of ROR enquiry, necessary orders will be passed on the request of the present writ petitioner Sri T.Srinivasulu, S/o. Soggadu as per R.O.R. Act.” 4. The learned counsel for the petitioner requested to dispose of the writ petition recording the above written instructions. 5. In view of the written instructions, the writ petition is disposed of directing the respondents Nos. 2 to 4 to complete the enquiry and pass an appropriate order within two (2) months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order by affording an opportunity of personal hearing to the petitioner. No costs. Pending miscellaneous petitions, if any, shall stand closed. ___________________ B. S. BHANUMATHI, J Dt.13.07.2026 RAR Whether the order is: Speaking: Yes/No/ Reasoned Yes/No Reportable Yes/No / Non-Reportable Yes/No