APHC010389542022 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3601] WEDNESDAY, THE 5th DAY OF AUGUST 2026 PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE RAVI NATH TILHARI THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE PURUSHOTTAM KUMAR CHINTALAPUDI WRIT APPEAL NO: 629/2022 Writ Appeal under clause 15 of the Letters Patent to set aside the order under challenge by allowing the instant writ appeal and pass Between: 1. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH,, REP BY ITS PRINCIPLE SECRETARY, REVENUE DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT, VELAGAPUDI, GUNTUR DISTRICT. 2. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, VISAKHAPATNAM 3. THE JOINT COLLECTOR, VISAKHAPATNAM 4. THE REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER,, VISAKHAPATNAM. ...APPELLANT(S) AND 1. UPPULURI NARAYANA RAO, S/o Butchiyya, Aged.62 Years, Plot.No.201, Golden Avas, Narasimha Nagar, Visakhapatnam ...RESPONDENT IA NO: 1 OF 2022 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 pleased to condone the delay of 20 days in presenting the above appeal against the order dated 07-12-2012 made in W.P.No.23040 of 2020 and pass 2 RNT,J & PKC,J W.A.No.629 of 2022 IA NO: 2 OF 2022 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 pleased to suspend the operation of the order of the Learned Single Judge dated 07-12-2020 made in W.P.No.23040 of 2020, pending disposal of the above Writ Appeal 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 set aside the dismissal Order dated 12.04.2024 in W.A. No.629 of 2022 and restore the Writ Appeal to its file in the interest of justice and pass IA NO: 2 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 dispense with the filing of certified copy of order Dt.12.04.2024 passed in W.A. No.629 of 2022 and pass IA NO: 3 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 condone the delay of 597 days in preferring the Restoration Petition in W.A. No.629 of 2022 in the interest of justice and pass Counsel for the Appellant(S): 1. ADDL ADVOCATE GENERAL (AP) Counsel for the Respondent: 1. V V SATISH The Court made the following Judgment: 3 RNT,J & PKC,J W.A.No.629 of 2022 THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE RAVI NATH TILHARI THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE PURUSHOTTAM KUMAR CHINTALAPUDI WRIT APPEAL NO: 629 OF 2022 JUDGMENT: (per Ravi Nath Tilhari, J) 1. Heard Sri Dammalapati Srinivas, learned Advocate General for the writ appellants and Sri V. V. Satish, the learned counsel for the respondent. 2. The respondent herein is the writ petitioner and the writ appellants are the respondents in W.P.No.23040 of 2020. 3. The writ petition was filed by the writ petitioner being aggrieved for the inaction of the District Collector and the Joint Collector, Visakhapatnam in not mutating the name of the writ petitioner in the revenue records with regard to the land to an extent of Ac.6-00 cents in Sy.No.57/2 of Yendada Village, Visakhapatnam Rural Mandal, Visakhapatnam District. 4. The learned Single Judge disposed of the writ petition by order, dated 07.12.2020 in the following terms: “5. Considering the submissions made by both the counsel, the 3rd respondent is directed to consider the application made by the petitioner on merits by taking all the relevant records into consideration and also the orders passed by the 1st respondent and also the report submitted by the 4th respondent on 21.5.2020 and pass appropriate orders within a period of six (06) weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.” 4 RNT,J & PKC,J W.A.No.629 of 2022 5. The direction has been given to consider the application of the writ petitioner by the Joint Collector by taking all the relevant records into consideration; the orders passed by the 1st respondent, the State through its Principal Secretary, Revenue as also the report submitted by the respondent No.4, dated 21.05.2020 and pass appropriate orders within the specified period. 6. Thereafter, the Joint Collector, Visakhapatnam passed the order in R.c.No.724/2022/D2, dated 27.07.2022 in the following terms: “In view of the provisions laid down in Section 5 A.P. Rights in land and pattadar passbooks Act, 1971, this authority directs the petitioners to apply before the competent authority i.e. Tahsildar for bringing about any amendment of entries under ROR Act. The Tahsildar, Visakhapatnam Rural is directed to take into consideration of the orders issued by the Govt in appeal petition No.203160/EA & AR/2016 DT: 15.03.2018, Memo No.21021/99/Assn.II(1) / 2018/ REV(Assn.II) DT:27.11.2018 the orders in W.P.No.23040/2020, all the facts of the case and pass appropriate orders within stipulated time after receiving the application from the petitioners.” 7. The Joint Collector has taken the view that under Section 5 of the Andhra Pradesh Rights in Land and Pattadar Passbooks Act, 1971 (the Act, 1971), the Tahsildar was the competent authority for bringing any amendment of entries and directed the writ petitioners to appear before the Competent Authority who was also issued the directions as contained in the order dated 27.07.2022. 8. The contempt petition in C.C.No.1424 of 2022 was filed alleging willful disobedience of the Order passed in the writ petition. Thereafter, 5 RNT,J & PKC,J W.A.No.629 of 2022 the writ appellants filed the Writ Appeal along with an application for condonation of delay. 9. The application for condonation of delay has already been allowed on 18.08.2022. The delay has been condoned. 10. The learned Advocate General submits that the writ petitioner’s father had previously filed writ petition No.1926 of 2015 in which an interim order dated 04.02.2015 was granted, with respect to the mutation for the same subject land. The writ petitioner did not disclose about that writ petition. So in the present writ petition No.23040 of 2020 there was suppression of fact which was disposed of. 11. Learned counsel for the 9th respondent submits that under the order in appeal the learned Single Judge has directed that the 3rd respondent shall consider the report submitted by the 4th respondent dated 21.05.2020 and pass appropriate orders. He submits that, such direction could not be given for any report and the only direction, could be only for consideration. He expressed apprehension that the authority to take decision under the Act, 1971 shall treat the direction as if the report dated 21.05.2020 is binding. 12. Sri V. V. Satish, learned counsel for the writ petitioner submits that the Joint Collector has not complied with the Writ Court Order and so Contempt was filed. He submits that the order of the State Government, 6 RNT,J & PKC,J W.A.No.629 of 2022 dated 15.03.2018, was kept under suspension, vide order dated 17.05.2018, but later on the suspension order has been withdrawn. He further submits that so far as writ petition No.1926 of 2015 is concerned, the petitioner’s father died. So fresh cause of action has occurred to the petitioner to maintain fresh writ petition. Any non disclosure was neither intentional nor was material. It also did not affect the decision of the W.P.No.23040 of 2020 which has been disposed of by an innocuous order. 13. On consideration of the aforesaid submissions and perusal of the material on record. We are of the view that the scope of the Writ Appeal is confined to the legality or otherwise of the order passed in the writ petition No.23040 of 2020. Simple direction has been given to the 3rd respondent in the writ petition to consider the writ petitioner’s application on merits by taking all the relevant records; the orders passed by the 1st respondent therein as also the report submitted by the 4th respondent on 21.05.2020. Such is a simple direction to consider. There is nothing to pass the order in a particular way or as per the report. The direction is very clear to consider and pass appropriate orders, in accordance with law. So, the apprehension expressed by the learned Advocate General is unfounded. It is for the appropriate authority to take into consideration all the relevant aspects and pass the order in accordance with law. 7 RNT,J & PKC,J W.A.No.629 of 2022 14. With respect to the alleged non-disclosure of writ petition No.1926 of 2015 is concerned, we are of the view that the petitioner ought to have disclosed that petition filed by his father, but in view of the death of the petitioner’s father the petitioner could as well maintain the writ petition No.23040 of 2020 in his own right. 15. In case of any grievance with respect to the order of the revenue authority under the Act, 1971, to be passed afresh, the aggrieved party shall have his remedy open before the appropriate forum. 16. No case for interference is made out. 17. The Writ Appeal is dismissed but with the observations as made above. No order as to costs. As a sequel thereto, miscellaneous petitions, if any pending, shall also stand closed. ____________________ RAVI NATH TILHARI,J _____________________________________ PURUSHOTTAM KUMAR CHINTALAPUDI,J Dated: 05.08.2026 KPV 8 RNT,J & PKC,J W.A.No.629 of 2022 193 THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE RAVI NATH TILHARI THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE PURUSHOTTAM KUMAR CHINTALAPUDI WRIT APPEAL NO: 629/2022 Dated: 05.08.2026 KPV