Andhra Pradesh High Court - Amravati
Nagireddy Appalanarsing Rao vs State Of Andhra Pradesh on 5 February, 2026
Author: B Krishna Mohan
Bench: B Krishna Mohan
APHC010057642026
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH
AT AMARAVATI [3233]
(Special Original Jurisdiction)
THURSDAY,THE FIFTH DAY OF FEBRUARY
TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE B KRISHNA MOHAN
WRIT PETITION NO: 3317/2026
Between:
1. NAGIREDDY APPALANARSING RAO, S/O. LATE LAXMAN RAO,
AGED ABOUT 73 YEARS, R/O. YEGUVAPETA VILLAGE,
BHIMUNIPATNAM MANDAL, VISAKHAPATNAM DISTRICT, STATE
OF ANDHRA PRADESH.
...PETITIONER
AND
1. STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL
SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, REVENUE DEPARTMENT,
SECRETARIAT BUILDINGS, VELAGAPUDI, AMARAVATI, GUNTUR
DISTRICT.
2. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, VISAKHAPATNAM, VISAKHAPATNAM
DISTRICT.
3. THE REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER, VISAKHAPATNAM DIVISION,
VISAKHAPATNAM.
4. THE TAHSILDAR, VISAKHAPATNAM RURAL MANDAL,
VISAKHAPATNAM, VISAKHAPATNAM DISTRICT.
5. THE SECRETARY, A.P.BHOODAN YAGNA BOARD, GANDHI
BHAVAN, HYDERABAD, STATE OF TELANGANA.
...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, order or direction more in the nature of 2 HBKM,J W.P.No.3317 of 2026 Mandamus declaring the proceedings vide Rc.No.637/2024/A dated 17-02- 2025 of the 4th Respondent rejecting to mutate the name of the petitioner in the online revenue records, over the land an extent of Ac.5.00 cents in Sy.No.132 of Paradesipalem Village, Visakhapatnam Rural Mandal, Visakhapatnam District, without considering the documents submitted by the petitioner along with the explanation submitted on 30-01-2025 and also contrary to the letter addressed by the 5th respondent vide proceedings in Ref No.BYB/B/27/272/55/14/2023 dated 27-01-2023 is illegal, arbitrary, violative property rights as guaranteed under Article 300-A of Constitution of India and without jurisdiction, consequently set- aside the proceedings vide Rc.No.637/2024/A dated 17-02-2025, by directing the 4th Respondent to mutate the name of the Petitioner in the online Revenue Records, over the land an extent of Ac.5.00 cents in Sy.No.132 of Pardesipalem Village, Visakhapatnam Rural Mandal, Visakhapatnam District 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 suspending the proceedings vide Rc.No.637/2024/A dated 17-02- 2025 of the 4thRespondent and pass Counsel for the Petitioner:
1. K KOUTILYA Counsel for the Respondent(S):
1. GP FOR REVENUE 3 HBKM,J W.P.No.3317 of 2026 The Court made the following Order:
Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue appearing for the respondent Nos.1 to 4.
2. This writ petition is filed questioning the order of the 4th respondent dated 17.02.2025 rejecting the request of the petitioner to incorporate his name in the revenue records for the subject land.
3. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the 4th respondent has not appreciated all the documents furnished during the enquiry by the petitioner, but only considered Bhoodan Yagna Board Proceedings dated 25.04.2014, the letter of the Bhoodan Yagna Board addressed to the petitioner dated 25.04.2014, the FMB, 10 (1), Adangals, Death Certificate of Sri Nagireddy Laxmana Rao, cist receipts, pattadar passbooks and the letter of the District Collector, Visakhapatnam addressed to the Secretary, A.P. Bhoodan Yagna Board, Hyderabad dated 18.10.2007. Ultimately upon consideration of the material available on record, the 4th respondent gave a finding that the petitioner is having neither title nor possession of the subject land, which is contrary to the Andhra Pradesh ROR Act, 1971 and as such, the request of the petitioner was not considered by rejecting the same under the above said impugned order dated 17.02.2025.
4. On the other hand, the learned Assistant Government Pleader appearing for the respondent Nos.1 to 4 submits that the petitioner has got remedy of appeal to the 3rd respondent against the impugned order of the 4th 4 HBKM,J W.P.No.3317 of 2026 respondent dated 17.02.2025 and in case of filing of such appeal, the same would be considered by the Appellate Authority, following the due procedure.
5. In view of the above said facts and circumstances, the petitioner is permitted to prefer an appeal against the order of the 4th respondent dated 17.02.2025, enclosing all the necessary documents in support of his claim, before the Appellate Authority/the 3rd respondent within a period of four (04) weeks from the date of receipt of this order. On receipt of such appeal from the petitioner, the 3rd respondent shall consider and dispose of the same, strictly in accordance with law, by hearing all the parties concerned, including the petitioner and the 5th respondent and the others concerned, upon verification of the records and the subject land, appropriate decision shall be taken on its own merits, as expeditiously as possible preferably within a period of four (04) months thereafter. If any interim relief is required, it is open for the petitioner to move before the Appellate Authority.
6. Accordingly, this Writ Petition is disposed of. Interim order if any deemed to have been vacated. There shall be no order as to costs.
As a sequel, Interlocutory Applications pending, if any, shall stand closed.
__________________________ JUSTICE B. KRISHNA MOHAN 05.02.2026 PGT