Andhra Pradesh High Court - Amravati
Thippana Varamma, vs The State Of Andhra Pradesh on 24 September, 2025
APHC010499412025
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH
AT AMARAVATI [3329]
(Special Original Jurisdiction)
WEDNESDAY,THE TWENTY FOURTH DAY OF SEPTEMBER
TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE VENKATESWARLU NIMMAGADDA
WRIT PETITION NO: 26132/2025
Between:
1. THIPPANA VARAMMA,, W/O. LAKSHUMAIAH, AGED 45 YEARS,
OCC- HOUSEWIFE, R/O. D.NO.6/104, ANNAMAYYA NAGAR,
PEDDAKARIMPALLI VILLAGE AND GRAMA PANCHAYAT,
RAJAMPETA MANDAL, ANNAMAYYA DISTRICT, ERSTWHILE
KADAPA DISTRICT.
...PETITIONER
AND
1. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, , REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL
SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, PANCHAYAT RAJ AND RURAL
DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT, VELAGAPUDI,
AMARAVATHI, GUNTUR DISTRICT.
2. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR PANCHAYAT WING, ANNAMAYYA
DISTRICT AT RAYACHOTI, ERSTWHILE KADAPA DISTRICT.
3. THE DISTRICT PANCHAYAT OFFICER, ANNAMAYYA DISTRICT AT
RAYACHOTI, ERSTWHILE KADAPA DISTRICT.
4. THE MANDAL PARISHAD DEVELOPMENT OFFICER MPDO,
RAJAMPETA MANDAL, ANNAMAYYA DISTRICT, ERSTWHILE
KADAPA DISTRICT.
5. THE PEDDAKARIMPALLI GRAMA PANCHAYAT, REP. BY ITS
EXECUTIVE AUTHORITY CUM PANCHAYAT SECRETARY,
RAJAMPETA- MANDAL, ANNAMAYYA DISTRICT, ERSTWHILE
KADAPA DISTRICT.
2
...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 particularly one in
the nature of WRIT OF MANDAMUS declaring the action of Respondents
more particularly Respondent No.4, 5 and their subordinates in insisting the
Petitioner to vacate from her house property bearing (Plot No.43) Door. No.
6/104, situated in an extent of Ac.0.03 Cents covered by Sy. No. 810/2 of
Annamayya Nagar, Peddakarimpalli Grama Panchayat, Rajampeta Mandal,
Annamayya District, Erstwhile Kadapa District, as illegal, irregular, arbitrary
and without jurisdiction and offends Articles 14, 21 and 300-A of the
Constitution of India and consequently direct the Respondents particularly
Respondent No.4, 5 and their subordinates not to interfere with peaceful
possession of Petitioner over her said property and pass
IA NO: 1 OF 2025
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 direct the Respondents particularly Respondent No.4, 5 and their
subordinates not to insist the Petitioners vacate from her house property
bearing (Plot No.43) Door. No. 6/104, situated in an extent of Ac.0.03 Cents
covered by Sy. No. 810/2 of Annamayya Nagar, Peddakarimpalli Village and
Grama Panchayat, Rajampeta Mandal, Annamayya District, Erstwhile
Kadapa District, pending disposal of main writ petition and pass
Counsel for the Petitioner:
1. PALA KARTHI KIRAN
Counsel for the Respondent(S):
1. GP FOR PANCHAYAT RAJ RURAL DEV
The Court made the following:
3
THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE VENKATESWARLU NIMMAGADDA
WRIT PETITION.NO.26132 OF 2025
ORDER:-
This writ petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of the India seeking the following reliefs:-
"to issue a writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of WRIT OF MANDAMUS declaring the action of Respondents more particularly Respondent Nos.4, 5 and their subordinates in insisting the Petitioner to vacate from her house property bearing (Plot No.43) Door No.6/104, situated in an extent of Ac.0.03 Cents covered by Sy.No.810/2 of Annamayya Nagar, Peddakarimpalli Grama Panchayat, Rajampeta Mandal, Annamayya District Erstwhile Kadapa District as illegal, irregular, arbitrary and without jurisdiction and offends Articles 14, 21 and 300-A of the Constitution of India and consequently direct the Respondents particularly Respondent Nos. 4, 5 and their subordinates not to interfere with peaceful possession of Petitioner over her said property and pass such other order or orders..."
2. Heard learned counsel for petitioner, learned Government Pleader for Panchayat Raj and Rural Development and learned Standing Counsel for the respondents.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner herein is the absolute owner and possessor of the house property bearing (Plot No.43) Door No.6/104, situated in an extent of Ac.0.03 Cents covered by Sy.No.810/2 of Annamayya Nagar, Peddakarimpalli Grama Panchayat, Rajampeta Mandal, Annamayya District Erstwhile Kadapa District. Later, the petitioner herein constructed an RCC roof building at the subject plot and has been paying the property tax since decades. While things stood thus, pursuant to the application dated 19.06.2025 submitted by one Sri C.Diddayya seeking information under 4 Right to Information Act, 2005 (in short 'the Act'), respondent No.5/ Gram Panchayat issued a notice dated 15.09.2025 directing the petitioner herein to furnish the documents pertaining to her land, answering the query of the RTI applicant i.e., one Sri C.Diddayya. He further submits that the impugned notice dated 15.09.2025 is contrary to law and also the provisions made under the Act. Whereas, the respondent No.5 can provide documents whichever possessed by him as per record in view of the RTI application under RTI Act. But, without doing so as contemplated, the respondent No.5 straightaway issued the impugned notice to the petitioner herein for production of the same, which is contrary to law and liable to be set aside.
4. On the other hand, learned Standing Counsel for the respondent submits that issuance of subject notice is contrary to the provisions of the RTI Act and also the provisions of the Andhra Pradesh Panchayat Raj Act, 1994. He further submits that in view of the grievance of the applicant under RTI, the respondent No.5 shall proceed in accordance with law as per records available with it. But cannot issue any notice to the property holder for production of documents of her property pursuant to the RTI application which is not contemplated under law.
5. Considering the submissions made by both the learned counsel and on perusal of the material placed on record, it appears that the impugned notice dated 15.09.2025 is without jurisdiction and contrary to law. The act of the respondent No.5 directing the petitioner to submit documents relating to her house property in pursuant to the RTI application submitted by the third party/ complainant cannot empower the Gram Panchayat to direct the petitioner to 5 submit her property documents to meet the exigencies without holding such documents. Moreover, the scheme of the Act contemplates that the public authority shall provide information as sought for, to the extent of information available with its office, under Section 6 of the Act and cannot procure the documents from the third parties or individuals or property holders for addressing the RTI applications filed by the other third parties in the absence of documents available with the office. Hence, issuance of subject notice dated 15.09.2025 is without jurisdiction and contrary to law.
6. Accordingly, the present Writ Petition is allowed, with the following directions:
i) The impugned notice dated 15.09.2025 is hereby set aside;
ii) However, the respondent No.5 is at liberty to reply to the RTI applicant as per the records available with the office.
iii) Further, if the respondents intend to take any action in respect of the property of the petitioner, they are at liberty to follow due process of law.
There shall be no order as to costs.
Consequently, miscellaneous petitions, pending, if any, shall stand closed.
__________________________________ VENKATESWARLU NIMMAGADDA, J Date:24.09.2025 BSP 6 153 THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE VENKATESWARLU NIMMAGADDA WRIT PETITION.NO.26132 OF 2025 DATED:24.09.2025 BSP