APHC010385742026 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3331] TUESDAY, THE 18th DAY OF AUGUST 2026 PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE SUBBA REDDY SATTI WRIT PETITION NO: 20943/2026 Between: 1. SMT. JAMMULA SIVA PARVATHI, W/O. LATE SAMBASIVA RAO, AGE 62 YEARS 2. JAMMULASATISH KUMAR, S/O. LATE SAMBASIVA RAO,AGE 46 YEARS, 3. JAMMULADHARANI @ BABY, D/O. LATE SAMBASIVA RAO , AGE 44 YEARS. ALL ARE R/O. IIILANE, MUTYALAREDDY NAGAR, AMARAVATHIROAD,GUNTUR(D) - 522007 ...PETITIONER(S) AND 1. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY REVENUE DEPT, SECRETARIAT BUILDINGS, VELAGAPUDI, TULLURU (M), GUNTUR (D) -522503 2. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, GUNTUR -522001 3. THE TAHSILDAR, TENALI, GUNTUR DIST. -522201 4. THE REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER, GUNTUR -522001 5. THE TAHSILDAR, PEDAKAKANIMANDAL, PEDAKAKANI, GUNTUR DISTRICT.-522508 6. ALASESHAMMA, W/O. NAGESWARA RAO, 66 YEARS, R/O.D.NO.8-3, UPPALAPADU VILLAGE, PEDAKAKANIMANDAL, GUNTUR (D) -522509 7. JAMMULA SATYANARAYANA, S/O.LATE TATAIAH, AGED 64 YEARS, R/O.D.NO.7-57, UPPALAPADU VILLAGE, PEDAKAKANI(M), GUNTUR (D)522509 8. JAMMULASUBBARAO, S/O. LATE TATAIAH, AGED 62 YEARS, R/O.D.NO.8-3, UPPALAPADU VILLAGE, PEDAKAKANI (M), GUNTUR (D) 522509 9. JAMMULARANGA RAO, S/O. LATE TATAIAH, AGED 60 YEARS, R/O.D.NO.8-9, UPPALAPADU VILLAGE, PEDAKAKANI (M), GUNTUR (D) 522509 10. JAMMULAVENKATESWARA RAO, S/O. LATETATAIAH, AGED 59 YEARS, R/O.D.NO.2-98, UPPALAPADU VILLAGE, PEDAKAKANI (M), GUNTUR (D) 522509 ...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 topleased to issue a Writ of Mandamus or any other appropriate Writ, Order or direction, declaring that the highhanded action of the Respondents herein trying to mutate the names of the 6 to 10 in respect of the Petition schedule properties mentioned in Annexure-I in favour of the Respondents 6 to 10 pending partition suit O.S.No.83/2019 before III Additional District Judge, Guntur for partition of Petition schedule properties into 6 equal shares and allot one such share to Petitioners herein, is as illegal, arbitrary and violative of fundamental rights guaranteed under Article 14, 21 and 300-A of the Constitution of India, consequently Respondents directing the Official Respondents not to make any entries to be in respect of Petition schedule properties mentioned in Annexure I infavour of anybody till disposal of the partition suit O.S.No.83/2019 before Mi Additional District Judge, Guntur 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 pleased to directing the Official Respondents not to make any entries to be in respect of Petition schedule properties mentioned in Annexure - I infavour of anybody till disposal of the partition suit O.S.No.83/2019 before III Additional District Judge, Guntur and pass Counsel for the Petitioner(S): 1. K K DURGA PRASAD Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. GP FOR REVENUE The Court made the following: ::ORDER :: Heard Sri K.K.Durga Prasad, learned counsel for the petitioners, and Sri G.Divya Theja, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue appeared for respondents 1 to 4. Notice in respect of respondent Nos.6 to 10 is dispensed with, since no adverse order passed affecting the right and interest of respondent Nos.6 to 10. 2. The above writ petition was filed to declare the action of respondent No.5 in attempting to mutate the names of respondent Nos.6 to 10, pending suit in O.S.No.83 of 2019 on the file of the learned III Additional District Judge, Guntur, filed by the petitioners seeking partition of the properties, as illegal and arbitrary. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioners would submit that the petitioners filed O.S.No.83 of 2019 against respondent Nos.6 to 10 seeking partition. The 4th defendant in the suit filed a written statement, and the same was adopted by defendants 1 and 2. Pending the suit, respondent Nos.6 to 10 are influencing respondent No.5 to update the record of rights by mutating their names. 4. Sri Divya Theja, learned Assistant Public Prosecutor for Revenue, on instructions of respondent No.5, would submit that the authority has not received any application regarding updation of record of rights in relation to the properties mentioned in Annexure-I. In paragraph 6 of the instructions, it is noted as follows: “6. It is submitted that if any application is received from any of the parties in future, the same will be processed and disposed of strictly as per procedure laid down in ROR Act and on merits, after hearing all parties.” 5. In view of the instructions, the apprehension of the petitioner is misconceived. 6. Given the facts and circumstances of the case, the Writ Petition is disposed of at the stage of admission, with the consent of the learned counsel appearing on either side, directing respondent No.5 to follow due procedure in accordance with law. No order as to costs. As a sequel, pending miscellaneous petitions, if any, shall stand closed. ___________________________ JUSTICE SUBBA REDDY SATTI Date:18.08.2026 JLV Whether the order is : Speaking Yes/No / Reasoned Yes/No Reportable Yes/No / Non-Reportable Yes/No 97 THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE SUBBA REDDY SATTI WRIT PETITION NO: 20943 of 2026 Date: 18.08.2026 JLV