Andhra Pradesh High Court - Amravati
Y S Madhavi Latha vs The State Of Andhra Pradesh on 30 October, 2025
APHC010574262025
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH
AT AMARAVATI [3330]
(Special Original Jurisdiction)
THURSDAY, THE THIRTIETH DAY OF OCTOBER
TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE TARLADA RAJASEKHAR RAO
WRIT PETITION NO: 29783/2025
Between:
1. Y S MADHAVI LATHA, S/O. Y.S.MADAN MOHAN REDDY
AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS, R/O. D.NO.4-11-146,
AMBAKAPALLIRAOD, PULIVENDULA, Y.S.R KADAPA
DISTRICT.
2. Y.S. MADAN MOHAN REDDY,, S/O. Y.S. PRAKASH REDDY
AGED ABOUT 60 YEARS, R/O. D.NO.4-11-146,
AMBAKAPALLIRAOD, PULIVENDULA, Y.S.R KADAPA
DISTRICT.
...PETITIONER(S)
AND
1. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP., BY ITS
PRINCIPAL SECRETARY REVENUE DEPARTMENT,
SECRETARIAT BUILDINGS, VELAGAPUDI, AMARAVATHI,
GUNTUR DISTRICT.
2. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, Y.S.R KADAPA DISTRICT,
KADAPA.
3. THE JOINT COLLECTOR, Y.S.R KADAPA DISTRICT, KADAPA.
4. THE DISTRICT REVENUE OFFICER, JOINT COLLECTOR
OFFICE Y.S.R KADAPA DISTRICT.
5. THE REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER, PULIVENDULA
REVENUE DIVISION Y.S.R KADAPA DISTRICT.
6. THE TAHSILDAR, THONDURMANDAL, Y.S.R KADAPA
DISTRICT.
...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 to issue an appropriate Writ, Order or direction
more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the
action of the respondent No.3 in taking up Suo Moto Revision under
Section 9 of the A.P. Rights in Land and Pattadar Pass Books Act,
1971 in respect of the land in an extent of Ac.4.70 cents in
Sy.No.1087-1, Ac.4.60 cents in Sy.No.1087-2, Ac.4.80 cents in
Sy.No.1087-3, Ac.4.90 in Sy.No.1087-4 and Ac.5.00 cents in
Sy.No.1087-5 of Mallela Village, Thondur Mandal, Y.S.R Kadapa
District belong to us, by issuing notice in Ref.No.E2/601/2025, dated
09.10.2025 basing on the reports said to have been submitted by the
respondent No.5 that, the aforementioned land was illegally got
2
entered in our names in the revenue records and consequential action
of the respondent No.4 calling upon us to attend for the hearing
alongwith relevant records, as arbitrary, illegal as arbitrary, illegal,
contrary to the principles laid down by this Hon'ble Court vide Order,
dated 08.10.2021 in W.P.No.16458 of 2021 and the provisions of the
A.P. Rights in Land and Pattadar Pass Books Act, 1971 and also the
well established legal principles apart from being violative of the
fundamental and the Constitutional rights guaranteed to me under
Articles, 14, 19, 21 and 300-A of the Constitution of India and
consequently setaside the same 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 grant stay of all further
proceedings inpursuance of the Notice in Ref.No.E2/601/2025, dated
09.10.2025 issued by the respondent No.4, pending disposal of the
above Writ Petition and pass
Counsel for the Petitioner(S):
1. V R REDDY KOVVURI
Counsel for the Respondent(S):
1. GP FOR REVENUE
3
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE TARLADA RAJASEKHAR RAO
WRIT PETITION No.29783 OF 2025
ORDER:
The present Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking the following relief:
"...to issue an appropriate Writ, Order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the respondent No.3 in taking up Suo Moto Revision under Section 9 of the A.P.Rights in Land and Pattadar Pass Books Act, 1971 in respect of the land in an extent of Ac.4.70 cents in Sy.No.1087-1, Ac.4.60 cents in Sy.No.1087-2, Ac.4.80 cents in Sy.No.1087-3, Ac.4.90 in Sy.No.1087-4 and Ac.5.00 cents in Sy.No.1087-5 of Mallela Village, Thondur Mandal, Y.S.R Kadapa District, belong to us, by issuing notice in Ref.No.E2/601/2025, dated 09.10.2025 basing on the reports said to have been submitted by the respondent No.5 that, the aforementioned land was illegally got entered in our names in the revenue records and consequential action of the respondent No.4 calling upon us to attend for the hearing alongwith relevant records, as arbitrary, illegal as arbitrary, illegal, contrary to the principles laid down by this Hon'ble Court vide Order, dated 08.10.2021 in W.P.No.16458 of 2021 and the provisions of the A.P. Rights in Land and Pattadar Pass Books Act, 1971 and also the well established legal principles apart from being violative of the fundamental and the Constitutional rights guaranteed to me under Articles, 14, 19, 21 and 300-A of the Constitution of India and consequently set aside the same and pass such other order...."
2. The respondent No.3 issued notice dated 09.10.2025 by exercising powers under Section 9 of the Andhra Pradesh Rights in Land and Pattadar Pass Books Act, 1971 (hereinafter for short referred to as the 'Act), directing the petitioners to attend for an enquiry with all necessary original documents and records pertaining to the land admeasuring Ac.4.70 cents in Sy.No.1087-1, Ac.4.60 cents in Sy.No.1087-2, Ac.4.80 cents in Sy.No.1087-3, Ac.4.90 cents in 4 Sy.No.1087-4 and Ac.5.00 cents in Sy.No.1087-5 of Mallela Village, Thondur Mandal, Y.S.R. Kadapa District, failing which, matter will be decided ex parte as per records available.
3. The said notice is assailed in the present writ petition on the ground that no prior notice was issued before issuing notice under Section 9 of the Act and also relied on the judgments rendered by the Coordinate Bench of this Court in W.P.No.16458 of 2021 dated 08.10.2021 and W.P.No.30186 of 2024 dated 20.12.2024 and prayed to pass similar order in the present writ petition as well.
4. Learned Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue would submit that Section 9 of the Act does not suggest or require the issuance of prior notice before initiating proceedings.
5. A learned single Judge of this Court in W.P. No.16458 of 2021 following the law laid down in the judgment in M/s D.N.Ray vs State of Bihar1 of the Hon'ble Apex Court held that a prior show cause notice is required before issuance of notice under Section 9 of the Act. Following the judgment in W.P.No.42510 of 2016, another learned Single Judge of this Court, in W.P.No.30186 of 2024, held the same.
6. As outlined in the judgments referred supra, it is incumbent on the 3rd respondent to give notice to the petitioners before initiating suo motu proceedings and then pass final order. Therefore, the impugned notice is not sustainable.
1 AIR 1971 SC 1045 5
7. Therefore, this Court instead of quashing the impugned notice dated 09.10.2025, it would be treated as a show cause notice. Accordingly, the impugned notice issued under Section 9 of the Act is directed to be treated as show cause notice and the petitioners are directed to give their explanation to the above said notice within a period of 15 days from the date of receipt of copy of this order. On receipt of the said explanation, the 3rd respondent shall proceed as outlined in Section 9 of the Act, and pass appropriate orders on merits and in accordance with law. Till such time the impugned notice shall remain in abeyance.
8. Accordingly, the Writ Petition is disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs.
As a sequel thereto, miscellaneous petitions pending, if any shall stand closed.
__________________________________ JUSTICE TARLADA RAJASEKHAR RAO Date: 30.10.2025 Note: Issue C.C. by 03.11.2025 b/o KBN