APHC010339772026 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH (Special Original Jurisdiction) Monday, the twentieth day of July, two thousand twenty six The Honourable Ms. Justice B. S. Bhanumathi Writ Petition No.18137 of 2026 Between: Mekala Chenchamma, W/o. Malyadri, Chu mandal, Prakasam district, Andhra Pradesh. and 1. The State of Andhra Pradesh, rep. by its Principal Secretary, Revenue Department, Secretariat buildings, Velagapudi, Amaravati, Guntur district. 2. The District Collector, Ongole, Prakasam district. 3. The Tahsildar, V.V. Palem mandal, Prakasam district. Counsel for the petitioner: 1. M. Chalapathi 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) Monday, the twentieth day of July, two thousand twenty six Present The Honourable Ms. Justice B. S. Bhanumathi Writ Petition No.18137 of 2026 Mekala Chenchamma, W/o. Malyadri, Chundi village, V. V. mandal, Prakasam district, Andhra Pradesh. …Petitioner The State of Andhra Pradesh, rep. by its Principal Secretary, Department, Secretariat buildings, Velagapudi, Amaravati, Guntur district. The District Collector, Ongole, Prakasam district. sildar, V.V. Palem mandal, Prakasam district. …..Respondents Counsel for the petitioner: Counsel for the respondents: The Court made the following: [3311] Monday, the twentieth day of July, two thousand twenty six V. Palem …Petitioner The State of Andhra Pradesh, rep. by its Principal Secretary, Department, Secretariat buildings, Velagapudi, ..Respondents 2 BSB, J W.P.No.18137 of 2026 ORDER: This writ petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking the following relief:- “…to issue an appropriate writ, order or direction, more particularly one in the nature of writ of mandamus, declaring the inaction of the respondents Nos.2 and 3 in considering his request by seeking survey and demarcation of assigned land in Sy. No. 614/1, admeasuring Ac. 5.00 cents of the petitioner situated at Chundi Revenue village, V.V. Palem mandal, Prakasam district, as illegal, arbitrary, violative of the principles of natural justice and Articles 14, 21 and 300-A of the Constitution of India, and consequently direct the respondents to conduct survey, fix boundaries and protect lawful possession of the petitioner over the said land.” 2. The case of the petitioner, briefly stated, is as follows: The respondent No.3 assigned the petitioner an extent of Ac. 5.00 cents in Survey No. 614/1 situated at Chundi revenue village, V.V. Palem mandal, Prakasam district, for agricultural purposes. Consequently, the respondent No.3 issued a pattadar passbook and title deed book in favour of the petitioner. The name of the petitioner was mutated in the relevant revenue records. The petitioner has been in possession and enjoyment of the property since then. The neighbouring landholders are attempting to encroach the assigned land of the petitioner by taking advantage of absence of proper survey and boundary demarcation. Therefore, the petitioner has been repeatedly requesting the respondents to conduct survey and fix the boundaries of 3 BSB, J W.P.No.18137 of 2026 his lands. The respondent No.3 failed to consider the genuine request of the petitioner. Earlier, the petitioner submitted an application through MeeSeva during the years 2018 and 2021 seeking an F-Line survey. She submitted a petition in Spandana programme before the District Collector, Ongole. The petition was forwarded to the Tahsildar / respondent No.3. The Revenue Inspector and the Mandal Surveyor conducted an enquiry. Advance notice, dated 24.12.2021, was issued to the petitioner and also the adjoining landholders. In the presence of both the parties, survey was conducted. Reference was made to the field measurement book. It was noticed that the field measurement book register reflects only three sub-divisions in Sy. No. 614 whereas, as per the revenue records, including record No.1A, Sy. No. 614 is divided into eight sub-divisions. Though the petitioner produced revenue records before the respondent No.3, there is no further action. Hence, this writ petition was filed. 3. The learned Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue placed on record a copy of the written instructions of the respondent No.3 vide Rc. No. DT / 413 / 2026, dated 20.07.2026, wherein it is stated at paragraphs Nos.6 to 8 as follows:- “6. The writ petitioner stated at Para No.3 of her affidavit that she is in peaceful possession & enjoyment of the scheduled land and cultivating various agricultural crops in the scheduled land. On field enquiry, it is revealed that the writ petitioner is not in possession and enjoyment of the schedule land nearly twenty (20) years above. The schedule land is vacant / kept as Beedu bhoomi on ground at present. 4 BSB, J W.P.No.18137 of 2026 7. The writ petitioner stated at para No.3 of affidavit that she has been repeatedly requesting for survey, fixing of the boundaries & demarcation of the schedule land. But, the writ petitioner has not specified any physical / online / Spandana / F-line representations or dates and notices issued by the respondent No.3, if any. 8. The writ petitioner is recorded as pattadar in respect of the available revenue records. But, the writ petitioner is not in possession, cultivation & enjoyment of the schedule land since 20 years above. On enquiry, it is revealed that, other Chundi villagers are under possession, cultivation & enjoyment of the schedule land since long back. The land is kept as Beedu bhoomi on ground as on today.” 4. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the revenue authorities gave an endorsement, dated 24.02.2022, stating that the F.M.B. record shows only three sub-divisions in Sy. No. 614 whereas, the revenue record 1A of Chundi village discloses eight (8) sub- divisions of land in Sy. No. 614. 5. Insofar as non-submission of necessary documents is concerned, it can be easily verified by the revenue authorities and indicate whether it is genuine or not. Insofar as pattadar passbook and title deed are concerned, its copy was already enclosed to the petition. Even then, there is no clear statement in the written instructions as to whether the particulars furnished by the petitioner regarding the patta, the title deed and passbook are correct or not. Insofar as conflict in the sub-divisions is concerned, it is for the revenue authorities to look into that conflict and it has nothing to do with the role of the petitioner in any manner. 5 BSB, J W.P.No.18137 of 2026 Under these circumstances, there is no merit to decline the application of the petitioner. 6. Therefore, the Writ Petition is disposed of, directing the respondent No.3 to pass a reasoned order on the application of the petitioner and take appropriate action as per the decision taken thereon, within three (3) months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. There shall be no order as to costs. Pending miscellaneous petitions, if any, shall stand closed. ___________________ B. S. BHANUMATHI, J Dt.20.07.2026 RAR Whether the order is : Speaking Yes/No / Reasoned Yes/No Reportable Yes/No / Non-Reportable Yes/No