Andhra Pradesh High Court - Amravati
Ravada Sanyasamma vs The State Of Ap on 30 December, 2025
Author: Ninala Jayasurya
Bench: Ninala Jayasurya
APHC010036892019
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA
PRADESH
[3209]
AT AMARAVATI
(Special Original Jurisdiction)
TUESDAY, THE THIRTIETH DAY OF DECEMBER
TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE NINALA JAYASURYA
WRIT PETITION NO.1684 OF 2019
Between:
Ravada Sanyasamma ...PETITIONER
AND
The State of AP, rep. by its
Principal Secretary,
Revenue Department and others ...RESPONDENTS
Counsel for the Petitioner:
1. KONA N.D.V.RAMANA RAO Counsel for the Respondents:
1. GP FOR REVENUE
2. SIVA RAMA KRISHNA KOLLURU The Court made the following ORDER:
The present Writ Petition is filed seeking to declare the action of the official respondents in not mutating the name of the petitioner in the revenue records in respect of an extent of Ac.0.20 cents in Survey No.76/5A of Boravanipalem village, Paradesipalem Panchayat, Visakhaptnam Rural Mandal, NJS, J WP No.1684 of 2019 2 Visakhapatnam district, as illegal, contrary to Section 5 of the AP Rights in Land and Pattadar Passbooks Act, 1971, and for consequential directions.
2. Learned counsel for the petitioner made submissions with reference to the averments made in the affidavit filed in support of the Writ Petition and the circumstances under which the petitioner approached the official respondents seeking mutation of her name in the revenue records in respect of the above said extent of land. He submits that the unofficial respondents, who got themselves impleaded in the present Writ Petition, in collusion with the revenue officials are attempting to encroach upon the subject matter land and, therefore, unless the name of the petitioner is recorded in the revenue records, she would suffer serious prejudice and irreparable loss.
3. Though the learned counsel for the unofficial respondents seeks to make submissions with reference to various allegations made in the Writ affidavit, stating that the names of the unofficial respondents have already been mutated in the revenue records, this Court is of the view that the same need not be examined. Suffice to say that the grievance of the petitioner is inaction on NJS, J WP No.1684 of 2019 3 the part of the 2nd respondent in mutating her name in the revenue records.
4. However, as seen from the material on record, it would appear that the petitioner made a representation to the District Collector, Visakhapatnam, on 21.06.2018, instead of submitting an appropriate application to the concerned Tahsildar. In such an event, the grievance of the petitioner is misconceived.
5. Be that as it may. As the AP Rights in Land and Pattadar Passbooks Act, 1971, provides the procedure with regard to mutation of names in the revenue records, this Court deems it appropriate to dispose of the Writ Petition leaving it open to the petitioner to make appropriate online application to the Tahsildar concerned for mutation of her name in the revenue records in respect of the subject matter land. On receipt of such application, the Tahsildar concerned shall conduct enquiry, as contemplated under the provisions of the above referred Act, and after issuing notices to the petitioner as also the unofficial respondents and affording them an opportunity of hearing, pass appropriate orders, in accordance with law, as expeditiously as possible.
NJS, J WP No.1684 of 2019 4
6. With the above direction, the Writ Petition is disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs.
7. As a sequel thereto, the miscellaneous applications, if any, pending in this Writ Petition shall stand closed.
_____________________ NINALA JAYASURYA , J Date:30.12.2025 Nsr NJS, J WP No.1684 of 2019 5 HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE NINALA JAYASURYA Writ Petition No.1684 of 2019 Date:30.12.2025 Nsr