WP/32724/2025 of TANKALA ANANDA RAO Vs THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH on 3 May 2026

1. TANKALA ANANDA RAO, S/O LATE CHINNAVADU AGED ABOUT 68 YEARS, OCC MASON, R/O PATHAPATNAM VILLAGE AND MANDAL, SRIKAKULAM DISTRICT.

...PETITIONER AND

1. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, REVENUE DEPARTMENT SECRETARIAT,VELAGAPUDI, AMARAVATI, GUNTUR DISTRICT.

2. THE COLLECTOR AND DISTRICT MAGISTRATE, SRIKAKULAM DISTRICT.

3. THE REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER, TEKKALI, SRIKAKULAM DISTRICT.

4. THE TAHSILDAR, PATHAPATNAM MANDAL,

SRIKAKULAM DISTRICT.

5. NADIMINTI SUGREEVULU, S/O LATE SIRI DORA AGED ABOUT 70 YEARS, R/O PATHAPATNAM

VILLAGE AND

MANDAL, SRIKAKULAM DISTRICT.

6. K JANARDHANA RAO, S/O LATE JAGGA RAO, R/O PATHAPATNAM VILLAGE AND MANDAL, SRIKAKULAM DISTRICT.

7. K LINGA RAJU, S/O LATE JAGGA RAO, AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS, R/O PATHAPATNAM VILLAGE AND MANDAL, SRIKAKULAM DISTRICT.

8. K ANANDA RAO, S/O LATE JAGGA RAO, AGE NOT KNOWN, R/O PATHAPATNAM VILLAGE AND MANDAL, SRIKAKULAM DISTRICT.

9. K TEJESWARI, W/O RAMA RAO, AGED NOT KNOWN, R/O PATHAPATNAM VILLAGE AND MANDAL, SRIKAKULAM DISTRICT.

...RESPONDENT(S): Counsel for the Petitioner:

1. G Raja Babu Counsel for the Respondent(S):

1. GP for Revenue

2. Vinod Kumar Tarlada The Court made the following order:

Heard Sri G.Raja Babu, learned counsel for the petitioner, Smt. Kotharu Vijayeswari, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Land Acquisition appearing for respondent Nos.1 to 4 and Sri Vinod Kumar Tarlada, learned counsel for respondent Nos.5 to 9.

2. The instant writ petition is filed challenging the impugned endorsement dated 25.07.2025 issued by the 4th respondent, whereby the application submitted by the petitioner for mutation and issuance of pattadar pass books, was deferred.

3. The petitioner had filed an application seeking deletion of the names of the unofficial respondents from the revenue records; however, the same was not considered and no notice was issued to the petitioner, while the impugned endorsement dated 25.07.2025 was issued. Vide the said endorsement, the Tahsildar has observed that, in view of the pendency of the suit in O.S.No.39 of 2019, appropriate orders would be passed only after disposal of the said suit.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner has placed before this Court through a memo, a copy of the judgment and decree dated 22.12.2025 passed by the learned Senior Civil Judge, Tekkali, in O.S.No.39 of 2019, whereby the suit filed by the petitioner was decreed granting perpetual injunction, against the defendants, the respondent Nos.5 to 7 herein.

5. In view of the same, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that appropriate directions may be issued to the Tahsildar to consider and pass orders on the petitioner’s application, as the earlier refusal/determent was solely on the ground that the suit in O.S.No.39 of 2019 was pending as on the date of impugned endorsement.

6. Learned counsel for the unofficial respondents submits that an appeal has been preferred against the said judgment and decree in O.S.No.39 of 2019. However, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that no interim orders have been granted in the said appeal.

7. Having regard to the submissions made, this Court deems it appropriate to dispose of the writ petition by directing the Tahsildar – the 4th respondent herein to consider and pass appropriate orders in accordance with law, on the application filed by the petitioner, in light of the fact that the suit filed by the petitioner is no longer pending, after affording due opportunity of hearing to the petitioner and the unofficial respondent Nos. 5 to 9, within a period of three

(03) months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.

8. With the above direction, the Writ Petition is disposed of. No costs.

As a sequel, miscellaneous applications pending, if any, shall stand closed.

______________________________ JUSTICE KIRANMAYEE MANDAVA Date: 04.05.2026 BSK

THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE KIRANMAYEE MANDAVA

WRIT PETITION NO: 32724 OF 2025

Date: 04.05.2026 BSK