APHC010328652026 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH (Special Original Jurisdiction) Thursday, the 9 The Honourable Ms. Justice B.S.Bhanumathi Between: Nellipudi Harinadh and others The State of Andhra Pradesh and others Counsel for the petitioners: 1. K. Pallavi Counsel for the respondents: 1. G.P. for Revenue The Court made the following: IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) Thursday, the 9th day of July, 2026 Present The Honourable Ms. Justice B.S.Bhanumathi W.P.No: 17309 of 2026 Nellipudi Harinadh and others ...Petitioners and The State of Andhra Pradesh and others ...Respondents Counsel for the petitioners: Counsel for the respondents: The Court made the following: [3311] ...Petitioners ...Respondents 2 W.P.No.17309 of 2026 O R D E R: This petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India to issue an appropriate writ more particularly one in the nature of writ of mandamus declaring the action of the respondents Nos. 2 to 5 in not restoring the digital signature of the respondent No. 4, online 1-B record and No. 3 adangal in respect of the petitioners’ property i.e. land in Sy. No. 85, Khata No. 212, 213 admeasuring Ac.1-35 cents situated at Thamminapatnam Village, Chillakur Mandal, SPSR Nellore District by taking into consideration the judgment and decree dated 16.06.2025 in O.S. No. 115 of 2019 on the file of the court of Principal Junior Civil Judge, Gudur inspite of the representations dated 11.05.2026 and 25.05.2026 as illegal, arbitrary, opposed to the established principles of law and in violation of right of property guaranteed under Article 300-A of the Constitution of India and consequently direct the respondents Nos. 2 to 5 herein to restore the digital signature of the respondent No.4 herein, online 1-B record and No. 3 adangal of the petitioners’ land. 2. The case of the petitioners briefly stated, is as follows: The petitioners are the absolute owners of the subject land and the same is in their possession and enjoyment. In the year 2019, the respondents Nos. 6 to 9 made an attempt to interfere and cause obstruction with the petitioners’ peaceful possession and enjoyment of the subject land. Hence, this writ petition was filed. 3. The learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that since the representation of the petitioners, dated 25.05.2026 has not been disposed of, the writ petition may be disposed of directing the respondents to dispose of the representation of the petitioners by giving an opportunity to the unofficial respondents within the time fixed by this Court. 3 W.P.No.17309 of 2026 4. The learned Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue placed on record a copy of the written instructions of the respondent No.4, dated 02.07.2026 issued as follows: 1. An extent of Ac. 1.35 cents in S.No.85 of Thamminapatnam village, Chillakur Mandal is classified as patta land as per the village records. 2. The writ petitioner and another have filed a representation dated 19.05.2025 before the respondent No.5 stating that the RI and VRO were causing obstruction to their work and requesting to take necessary action against them. 3. Pending the enquiry, Sri Nellipudi Harinath and another filed O.S.No.115/2019 on the file of Prl. Civil Judge (Junior Division), Gudur against Nellipudi Polaiah and 3 others. 4. The learned Civil Judge decreed the same on 16-06-2025 in favour of the plaintiffs and granted permanent injunction restraining the defendants Nos. 1 to 4 and their men and agents from interfering with the peaceful possession and enjoyment of the plaint schedule property in any manner. 5. In this suit, the official respondents herein are not the defendants. 6. On the representation filed by the unofficial respondents herein, the Mandal Revenue Inspector and Village Revenue Officer, Thamminapatnam village orally informed to the writ petitioners, only with an intention to stop the disputes between the petitioners and unofficial respondents. 7. The respondent No.5 herein, did not initiate any action against the petitioner nor did he interfered with the peaceful possession and enjoyment of the petitioners, as the subject land is purely patta land. 4 W.P.No.17309 of 2026 8. When a civil dispute is involved with regard to patta land, it has to be decided by a competent Civil Court. Sec. 8(2) of A.P. Rights in Land and P.P.B. Act, 1971 and Rules-1989 amended thereon reads as follows. "As per Sec. 8(2) AP Rights in Lands and P.P.B. Act, 1971 and Rules 1989, when a serious civil dispute of title or claims or rival title it would not only be proper for the authorities to refrain from proceedings with the enquires as such under the provisions of the Act but also pragmatic for the parties to approach the civil court for establishing their right, title and interest what so eve nature where a suit of declaration is filed and a competent civil court declare the rights of the respective parties. The entries are required to be corrected in conformity with the decree." 5. Considering the above noted written instructions and the submission made by the learned counsel for the petitioners, the writ petition is disposed of directing the respondents to dispose of the representation of the petitioners dated 25.05.2026, as per law, after providing opportunity to the respondents Nos.6 to 8, as expeditiously as possible, preferably within a period of two (2) months from the date of receipt of copy of this order. There shall be no order as to costs. As a sequel thereto, miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending in this petition shall stand closed. ___________________ B. S. BHANUMATHI, J Dt. 09.07.2026 PNV Whether the order is : Speaking No / Reasoned Yes Reportable No / Non-Reportable Yes