Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Andhra Pradesh · body

2026 DAILYLAW 6761 (AP)

KunchepuEswaraiah, v. State of Andhra Pradesh

WP/20710/2019 · 2026-07-27

V Sujatha

body2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

APHC010427552019 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3333] TUESDAY, THE 28th DAY OF JULY 2026 PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE V.SUJATHA WRIT PETITION NO: 20710/2019 Between: 1. KUNCHEPUESWARAIAH,, AGED 70 YRS S/O K.GANGULAPPA, R/O ADAPALAVEEDHI KADIRI TOWN, ANANTAPURAMU DISTRICT- 515591 2. KUNCHEPULAKSHMINARAYANA,, AGED 65 YRS S/O K.GANGULAPPA, R/O ADAPALAVEEDHI KADIRI TOWN, ANANTAPURAMU DISTRICT-515591 3. KUNCHEPURAMACHANDRA, , AGED 59 YRS S/O K.GANGULAPPA, R/O ADAPALAVEEDHI KADIRI TOWN, ANANTAPURAMU DISTRICT- 515591 4. KUNCHEPU SHANKAR,, AGED 37 YRS S/O KUNCHEPUVENKATARAMANAPPA R/O ADAPALAVEEDHIKADIRI TOWN, ANANTAPURAMU (D)-515591 ...PETITIONER(S) AND 1. STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE, SECRETARIAT COMPLEX, VELAGAPUDI AMARAVATHI,REP BY ITS PRL. SECRETARY 2. THE JOINT COLLECTOR, ANANTAPURAMU DISTRICT 2 VS,J W.P.No.20710 of 2019 ANANTAPURAMU 3. THE TAHSILDAR, OBULADEVARACHERUVUMANDAL, ANANTAPURAMU DISTRICT 4. DERENGULAUTTAMMA, AGED 70 YRS W/O NARAYANA, R/O MITTAPALLI CROSS ROAD O.D.CHERUVUMANDAL, ANANTAPURAMU DISTRICT-515561 5. D ADILAKSHMAMMA RAZIYA BEE, AGED 50 YRS W/O MAHABOOBBASHA, R/O MITTAPALLI CROSS ROAD O.D.CHERUVUMANDAL, ANANTAPURAMU DISTRICT-515561 ...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 pass an order or direction or any other proceedings one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the 3rd respondent in nct granting the pattadar passbooks to the petitioners for the land to an extent of Ac. 11.62 cents of land in Sy.No. 777 of Inagaluru Village of 0.D.CheruvuMardal, Anantapuramu District in accordance with the order of the 2nd respondent it D.Dis. No.708/2017/D4 dated 6.4.2018 as illegal arbitrary and in violation of the provisions of the A.P Rights in Land and Pattadar Passbooks Act ,1971 besides petitioners rights guaranteed under Article 14,21 and 300A of the Constitution of India and consequently direct the respondents to immediately issue the Pattadar passbooks for the above said landsand pass IA NO: 1 OF 2019 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 3`d respondent to immediately issue the pattadar passbooks for the lands to an extent of Ac. 11.62 cents of land in Sy.No. 777 of Inagaluru Village of 0.D.CheruvuMandal, Anantapuramu District in accordance with the order of the 2nd respondent in D.dis No.708/2017/D4 dated 6.4.2018 pendingdisposal of the writ petition and pass 3 VS,J W.P.No.20710 of 2019 Counsel for the Petitioner(S): 1. HARISH KUMAR RASINENI Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. GP FOR REVENUE (AP) 2. AZARUDDIN P M A 3. M PRASADA RAO The Court made the following: 4 VS,J W.P.No.20710 of 2019 ORDER: This Writ Petition came to be filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, seeking the following prayer: “…to pass an order or direction or any other proceedings one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the 3rd respondent in nct granting the pattadar passbooks to the petitioners for the land to an extent of Ac. 11.62 cents of land in Sy.No. 777 of Inagaluru Village of 0.D.CheruvuMardal, Anantapuramu District in accordance with the order of the 2nd respondent it D.Dis. No.708/2017/D4 dated 6.4.2018 as illegal arbitrary and in violation of the provisions of the A.P Rights in Land and Pattadar Passbooks Act ,1971 besides petitioners rights guaranteed under Article 14,21 and 300A of the Constitution of India and consequently direct the respondents to immediately issue the Pattadar passbooks for the above said landsand pass…” 2. Today when the writ petition came up for hearing, Sri. Harish Kumar Rasineni, learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that petitioner Nos.1 to 3 are no more and that the 4th petitioner is not evincing interest in pursuing the writ petition. As such, requested to close the writ petition. 3. Recording the same, this writ petition is dismissed as abated with regard to petitioner Nos.1 to 3 and closed with regard to petitioner No.4. There shall be no order as to costs. 5 VS,J W.P.No.20710 of 2019 Consequently, Miscellaneous Petitions, if any, pending in this Petition shall stand closed. _____________________ JUSTICE V.SUJATHA 28.07.2026 Gss