WP/27418/2026 of Naguri Veneeth Kumar Reddy, Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh on 7 October 2026

1. NAGURI VENEETH KUMAR REDDY,, S/O SREENIVASULU REDDY AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS, OCC AGRICULTURIST, RESIDING AT D.NO.1-36, KONDAMANA 515134

2. KORRA RAMBABU NAIK, , S/O BADDE NAIK, AGED ABOUT 41 YEARS, OCC AGRICULTURIST, D.NO.7-51, NALLAGUTTA TANADA VILLAGE AND POST,

MUTHYALACHERUVU, KONDAMAYANIPALLEM VILLAGE 515134

...PETITIONER(S) AND

1. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, , REP., BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY

REVENUEL DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT, VELAGAPUDI. AMARAVATHI, GUNTUR DISTRICT 522002

2. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, KADIRI, SRI SATYA SAI DISTRICT 515134

3. THE REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER, KADIRI, SRI SATYA SAI DISTRICT.515134

4. THE TAHSILDAR, KADIRI, SRI SATYA SAI DISTRICT.515134

5. KORRA RAVI NAIK, S/O GOBRE NAIK,OCC AGRICULTURIST AGED ABOUT 48 YEARS,RESIDING NALLAGUTTA TANADA,

KADIRI RURAL MANDAL, NOW TEMPORARY RESIDING AT GUDDAMPALLI TANDA VILLAGE,

KRISHNAPURAM POST,

SRS,J W.P.No.27418 of 2026

MUDIGUBBA MANDAL, SRI SATYA SAI DISTRICT

6. KORRA VENKATESH NAIK, S/O GOBRE NAIK,OCC AGRICULTURIST AGED ABOUT 38 YEARS,RESIDING AT NALLAGUTTA TANADA, MUTHYALACHERUVU VILLAGE, KONDAMAYANIPALLEMPOST, KADIRI RURAL MANDAL, NOW TEMPORARY RESIDING AT GUDDAMPALLI TANDA VILLAGE, KRISHNAPURAM POST, MUDIGUBBA MANDAL, SRI SATYA SAI DISTRICT 515134

7. KORRA HANUME NAIK, S/O VASTRAM NAIK,OCC AGRICULTURIST AGED ABOUT 65 YEARS,RESIDING AT NALLAGUTTA TANADA, MUTHYALACHERUVU VILLAGE, KONDAMAYANIPALLEMPOST, KADIRI RURAL MANDAL, NOW TEMPORARY RESIDING AT GUDDAMPALLI TANDA VILLAGE, KRISHNAPURAM POST, MUDIGUBBA MANDAL, SRI SATYA SAI DISTRICT 515134

8. KORRA VEERANARAPPA NAIK, S/O HANUME NAIK OCC AGRICULTURIST AGED ABOUT 30 YEARS,RESIDING AT NALLAGUTTA TANADA, MUTHYALACHERUVU VILLAGE, KONDAMAYANIPALLEMPOST, KADIRI RURAL MANDAL, NOW TEMPORARY RESIDING AT GUDDAMPALLI TANDA VILLAGE, KRISHNAPURAM POST, MUDIGUBBA MANDAL, SRI SATYA SAI DISTRICT515134

9. KORRA LAKSHMI NAIK, S/O VASTRAM NAIK,OCC AGRICULTURIST AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS,RESIDING AT NALLAGUTTA TANADA, MUTHYALACHERUVU VILLAGE, KONDAMAYANIPALLEM POST, KADIRI RURAL MANDAL, NOW TEMPORARY RESIDING AT GUDDAMPALLI TANDA VILLAGE, KRISHNAPURAM POST, MUDIGUBBA MANDAL, SRI SATYA SAI DISTRICT- 515134

10. KORRA RAMU NAIK, S/O VASTRAM NAIK,OCC AGRICULTURIST AGED ABOUT 38 YEARS,RESIDING AT NALLAGUTTA TANADA,

KADIRI RURAL MANDAL, NOW TEMPORARY RESIDING AT GUDDAMPALLI TANDA VILLAGE,

KRISHNAPURAM POST, MUDIGUBBA MANDAL, SRI SATYA SAI DISTRICT- 515134

SRS,J W.P.No.27418 of 2026

11. KORRA HANIMI BAI, W/O GANE NAIK OCC AGRICULTURIST AGED ABOUT 60 YEARS,RESIDING AT NALLAGUTTA TANADA, MUTHYALACHERUVU VILLAGE, KONDAMAYANIPALLEM POST, KADIRI RURAL MANDAT, NOW TEMPORARY RESIDING AT GUDDAMPALLI TANDA VILLAGE,

KRISHNAPURAM POST, MUDIGUBBA MANDAL, SRI SATYA SAI DISTRICT- 515134

12. KORRA KRISHNA NAIK, S/O GANE NAIK, OCC AGRICULTURIST AGED ABOUT 32 YEARS,RESIDING AT NALLAGUTTA TANADA, MUTHYALACHERUVU VILLAGE, KONDAMAYANIPALLEMPOST, KADIRI RURAL MANDAL NOW TEMPORARY RESIDING AT GUDDAMPALLI TANDA VILLAGE,

KRISHNAPURAM POST, MUDIGUBBA MANDAL, SRI SATYA SAI DISTRICT

13. KORRA DEVI BAI, W/O SANKAR NAIK, OCC AGRICULTURIST AGED ABOUT 62 YEARS,RESIDING AT NALLAGUTTA TANADA,

KADIRI RURAL MANDAL NOW TEMPORARY RESIDING AT GUDDAMPALLI TANDA VILLAGE,

KRISHNAPURAM POST, MUDIGUBBA MANDAL, SRI SATYA SAI DISTRICT 515134

...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 toissue an appropriate Writ, order or direction more particularly one in nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of Respondents No.3 in entertaining the appeal RC.No.439/2025 filed by the unofficial Respondent No. 5 to 13 for cancellation of Pattadar Pass book and the title deed issued in favour of the petitioners herein pertaining to the property in Sy.No.848-2 admeasuring to an extent Ac.5.46 cents located in Muthyalacheruvu village, Kadiri Mandal as illegal, arbitrary, without Jurisdiction and contrary to the Andhra Pradesh Rights in Land and Pattadar Passbook Act and Rules 1989 and also the ratio laid down by this Honble High Court in Ratnamma Vs Revenue Divisional Officer 2015(5) ALT 228 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 stay of all further proceedings Appeal in RC.No.439/2025 on the file of the

SRS,J W.P.No.27418 of 2026

3rd respondent i.e., Revenue Divisional Officer, Kadiri, pending disposal of the Writ petition, Counsel for the Petitioner(S):

1. M S P REDDY Counsel for the Respondent(S):

1. GP FOR REVENUE

2. DODDAKA HARSHA VARDHAN The Court made the following Order:

Heard Sri M. S. P. Reddy, learned counsel for the petitioners, Sri Chandrasekhar, the learned Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue for respondents 1 to 4 and Sri Doddaka Harsha Vardhan, the learned counsel appearing for the respondents 5 to 13.

2. Entertaining an Appeal by the 3rd respondent under Section 5(4) of the Andhra Pradesh Rights in Land and Pattadar Passbooks Act, 1971 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’) at the behest of the respondents 5 to 13, without there being any order passed by the 4th respondent, the above writ petition was filed.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioners would submit that the respondents 5 to 13 have filed a Statutory Appeal on the file of the 3rd respondent vide Rc.No.439 of 2025 under Sections 5(4)/5(5) of the Act, and that the 3rd respondent has entertained the Appeal. In fact, the 1st petitioner filed a counter and opposed the said Appeal. He would also submit that in the absence of an order passed by the 4th respondent, an Appeal would not lie before the 3rd respondent and therefore, it is impermissible.

4. Sri Chandrasekhar, the learned Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue, would fairly submit that, in the absence of an order passed by the 4th respondent, an appropriate remedy available to the respondents 5 to 13 is a Revision under Section 9 of the Act.

SRS,J W.P.No.27418 of 2026

5. Sri Doddaka Harsha Vardhan, learned counsel appearing for the respondents 5 to 13, would fairly submit that the respondents 5 to 13 are not properly advised. Hence, they filed the Appeal before the 3rd respondent. He also submits that an appropriate remedy will be available under Section 9 of the Act and liberty would be granted to the respondents 5 to 13 to file a revision under Section 9 of the Act.

6. Given the facts and circumstances of the case, without going into the merits of the matter, the writ petition is disposed of, at the admission stage, with the consent of the learned counsel appearing on either side with the following directions:

(i) . The Appeal vide Rc.No.439 of 2025 filed by the respondents 5 to 13, which is pending on the file of the 3rd respondent, is hereby quashed on the ground of jurisdiction.

(ii) . However, this order would not preclude the respondents 5 to 13 from availing the remedy of filing a revision under Section 9 of the Act before the appropriate Authority.

(iv) . On filing of such revision, the learned Authority shall consider the same strictly in terms of the Act and the Rules made thereunder and shall pass appropriate orders.

There shall be no order as to costs. As a sequel, pending miscellaneous petitions, if any, shall stand closed.

___________________________ JUSTICE SUBBA REDDY SATTI Date: 08.10.2026 KPV

SRS,J

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE SUBBA REDDY SATTI

WRIT PETITION NO: 27418 OF 2026

Date: 08.10.2026 KPV