Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 9, Cited by 0]

Andhra Pradesh High Court - Amravati

Ramisetty Rama Rao, vs The State Of Andhra Pradesh, on 19 February, 2025

       IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH :: AMARAVATI

                        (Special Original Jurisdiction)

           WEDNESDAY, THE NINETEENTH DAY OF FEBRUARY
                    TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE


                                   PRESENT

       THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE KIRANMAYEE MANDAVA


                      WRIT PETITION NO: 6360 OF 2020


Between:


  1.   Ramisetty Rama Rao, S/o Venkateswarlu, Hindu, aged about 54 years,
  2.   Ramisetty Veera Sankara Rao, S/ o Rama Rao, Hindu, aged about 34
       years,

  3.   Ramisetty Amarendra Kumar, S/o Late Koteswara Rao, Hindu, aged
       about 14 being minor represented by his paternal uncle Ramisetty
       Rama Rao, Hindu, aged about 54 years.

       All are residents of Munagapadu Village, Cheruvu madhavaram post, G.
       Konduru Mandal, Krishna District.

                                                                   ...Petitioners

                                      AND


  1.   The State of Andhra Pradesh, Rep. by Principal Secretary, Revenue
       Department, Government of Andhra Pradesh, Secretariat Buildings,
       Velgapudi, Amaravathi, Guntur District - 522 503
  2.   The District Collector, Krishna District, Collectorate Compound,
       Machilipatnam.
  3.   The Revenue Divisional Officer, Krishna District, Collectorate
       Compound, Machilipatnam.
  4.   The Tahsildhar, G.Konduru Village and Mandal, Krishna District.

                                                                ...Respondents
            W
           r


    /
                       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 to issue a Writ order or direction, more particularly one in the
■       ■». '■   nfture of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of R2 and R3 in not
           "rectifying the entries in revenue records by deleting the words government
                 poramboku and gramakantam by incorporating the words pattaland and
                 ancestral land in respect of Ac.0.55cents in D.No.68/ 3 of Munagapadu
                 Village, G.Koduru Mandal, Krishna District inspite of several requests and
                 inspite of issuing pattadar passbook for title to me showing me as owner
                 and the property as ancestral is arbitrary, illegal being violative of article 21
                 and 300-A of Constitution of India and consequently direct the respondents
                 to delete the word gramakantam and government and poramboku land as
                 noted in column No.11 and 2, 3 of R.S.R and in adangal for possession
                 and in other revenue records and replace them with words patta land and
                 ancestral for land of Ac.0.55cents in D.No.68/3 of Munagapadu Village,

                 G.Konduru Mandal, Krishna District and direct them not to assign and allot
                 to weaker sections relating the same on government land.

                 lA NO: 1 OF 2020


                        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 to direct the respondents not to take any steps directly or indirectly
                 to evict the petitioner from the land of Ac.0.55cents         in   D.No.68/ 3 of

                 Munagapadu Village, G.Kondruadu Mandal, Krishna District during the
                 pendency of the Writ Petition before this Hon'ble Court.

                 Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI. ATCHUTUNI RAMA MOHAN RAO


                 Counsel for the Respondents: GP FOR REVENUE

                 The Court made the following order:
 #   APHC010103932020

                       IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH
                                      AT AMARAVATI                           [3458]
         S                     (Special Original Jurisdiction)

               WEDNESDAY, THE NINETEENTH DAY OF FEBRUARY
                        TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE

                                      PRESENT

             THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE KIRANMAYEE MANDAVA
                           WRIT PETITION NO: 6360/2020

    Between:

                                                                       ...Petitioners
    Ramisetty Rama Rao and others
                                         AND


    The State of Andhra Pradesh and others                          ...Respondents

    Counsel for the Petitioners:

         I.Atchutuni Rama Mohan Rao

    Counsel for the Respondents):

         1 .GP for Revenue (AP)

    The Court made the following order:

                                                                             for   the
             Heard Sri Atchutuni Rama Mohan Rao, learned counsel

    petitioners and learned Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue appearing
    for the respondents.


    2.       Being aggrieved by the inaction of the respondent Nos.2 and 3 in not
    rectifying the entries in the revenue records in respect of the Ac.0.55 cents in
    D.No.68/3 of Munagapadu Village, G.Koduru Mandal, Krishna District, the writ

     petition is filed. The petitioner has sought for a consequential direction to the
                                                 2

                                                                                          KM,J
                                                                            W.P.No.6360 of 2020

      respondents to delete the word -Gramakantam                 and "Government" and

      'Poramboke land" in column Nos.11 and 2, 3 of RSR and ini the adangal to
      replace the same with words patta land" and "ancestors land".

      3.
             The petitioner contends that the
                                                petitioner's father has gifted the subject
      property to the petitioners. The father of the
                                                       petitioner inherited the property
     from his father, i.e., the grandfather of the petitioners. It isi contended that the
     petitioners' grandfather purchased the subject property vide registered sale
     deed bearing No.972/1947 from one Kcneru Venkata Ratnam and others.
     4.     Although the pattadar passbooks were issued in favor of the petitioners
 after the execution of the registered gift deed the corresponding entries in the
 revenue records were not affected. Bringing this to the notice of the
 respondents, the father of the petitioners filed             a   representation    dated
 16.03.2013 and another undated representation to the 4'^
                                                                           respondent,
 However, the said representations
                                    were never considered by the respondents,
which constrained the petitioner to file the present writ petition.

5.
           In the representation, it was contended that the subject land is classified
as gramakantam land. The father of the petitioners sought deletion of the said
entry and incorporation of the petitioners name, stating that the subject land

has been put to agricultural purposes since time immemorial.

6.         Today, when the matter is taken up for hearing, the learned Assistant
Government Pleader for Revenue has placed on record a copy of the written
instructions received from the 4th respondent-Tahsildar dated 23.01.2025. A
                                                 3
                                                                                         m.j
    4                                                                       W.P.No.6360of2020



        perusal of the same reflect that the subject land is classified as Gramakantam
r       land in the revenue records. Although the property was initially listed under

        Section 22-A of the Registration Act under the prohibitory            list,   it was
r
        subsequently withdrawn pursuant to the instructions of the Government.

        7.    It is further stated that since Gramakantam lands are reserved only for

        house plots, and the applicant is using the subject land for agricultural
        purposes, the mutation has not been effected. Furthermore, the instructions
        state that the applicant has transferred the property. It is also stated that the
        document under which the property was transferred in favor of the petitioners

        is based on a square yard basis.


        8.     In reply, the learned counsel for the petitioner, referring to the adangal
        filed along with the writ petition dated 11.11.2012, contends that the extent of
        the land is shown on an acreage basis. The relevant entries in the Pattadar

         passbooks classify the subject land as dry land. He thus contends that the
         reasons   shown by the respondents for not acting on the application filed by
         the petitioner are not sustainable and prays for allowing the writ petition.

         9.    The learned counsel for the petitioners further submits that since the

         date of purchase of the subject land by their grandfather in 1947, the subject
         land has been put to agricultural purposes. However, the Sub-Registrar, for

         the purpose of registering the subject land, valued it on a square yard basis.
         Therefore, the petitioners had no other alternative except to mention it in the

         gift deed on a square yard basis.
                                           4

                                                                                   KM.J
                                                                      W.P.No.6360of2020

 10.
        Considered the rival submissions, before going into the issue raised in
 the writ petition, it is relevant to refer to the definition of   land" as defined

 under Section 2(4) of the Andhra Pradesh Rights in Land and Pattadar Pass
 Books Act, 1971, which reads as follows:


              "Section 2(4): "Land" means land which is used or is
             capable of being used for purposes of agriculture,
             including horticulture but does not Include land used
             exclusively for non-agricultural purposes;"
 11.
       The definition of "land" was amended with retrospective effect from
29.07.2021. The definition of land, as amended, reads as follows:

              "Section 2(4): "Land" means all lands, irrespective of its
             usage, falling within a Village, including Agricultural land,
             Non-Agricultural land, Gramakantam etc;"
12.
       Section 4 of the Act specifies that any person acquiring any right by
succession, survivorship, inheritance, partition, Government patta, decree of a
Court or otherwise, as owner, pattadar, mortgagee, occupant, or tenant of
land, and any person acquiring any right as occupant of land by any other
method, shall intimate in writing their acquisition of such right to the Tahsildar

within 60 days from the date of such acquisition through online submission.

13.    After submission of such intimation either online or in-person, the

Tahsildar shall determine whether and, if so, in what manner the record of

rights may be amended in consequence thereof, and shall carry out the

amendment in the record of rights in accordance with such determination.
                                                      5
                                                                                                   m,j
                                                                                     W.P.No.6360of2020


     14.     Having regard to the definition of "land" as defined under Section 2(4) of

     the    Act,   which      includes   agricultural      land,      non-agricultural   land,     and

f    Gramakantam land. The contention of the respondents that since the land was

     transferred on a square yard basis and since the land                         is classified    as


     Gramakantam land, the necessary mutation had not been carried out by them

     in the revenue records, is not sustainable.


     15.     In view of the above, the petitioner is granted liberty to file a fresh

     application before the revenue officials, seeking incorporation of necessary

     entries in the revenue records, in terms of the provisions of Section 5 of the

     Act. The petitioner shall file the application within a period of four weeks from

     the date of receipt of this order. Thereafter, the 4*'^ respondent shall dispose of

     the same within a period of three months.

                                                                th
     16.     The    written     instructions    of   the    4        respondent-Tahsildar,       dated

     23.01.2025 are placed on record.


     17.     With the above observation, the writ petition is disposed of. There shall

     be no order as to costs.



             As a sequel, all pending miscellaneous applications shall stand closed.



                                                                            Sd/- K. SRINIVASA RAJU
                                                                            ASSISTANT REGISTRAR
                                               //TRUE COPY//

                                                                               '   SECTION OFFICER
    To,


          1. The Principal Secretary, Revenue Department, Government of Andhra
            Pradesh, Secretariat Buildings, Velgapudi, Amaravathi, Guntur District-
            522 503.
 1^%
      2. The District Collector, Krishna District, Collectorate Compound,
         Machilipatnam.

      3. The Revenue Divisional Officer, Krishna District, Collectorate
         Compound, Machilipatnam.

      4. The Tahsildhar, G.Konduru Village and Mandal, Krishna District.

      5. One CC to Sri. Atchutuni Rama Mohan Rao Advocate [OPUC]
      6. Two CCs to GP for Revenue, High Court Of Andhra Pradesh. [OUT]

      7. Three CD Copies

        GSC
  HIGH COURT

DATED: 19/02/2025




ORDER
WP.No.6360 of 2020

Ov.

t 19 MAR 2025 ^ . Current ciecuon DISPOSING OF THE WP WITHOUT COSTS