WRIT PETITION 12668 of 2022 on 14 September 1975

1. The State of Andhra Pradesh^, Rep. by its Principal Secretary, RevenueDepartment, Secretariat, at Velagapudi, Amaravathi, Guntur District.Department, Secretariat, at Velagapudi, Amaravathi, Guntur District.

2. The District Collector, Chittoor, Chittoor District.

3. The Revenue Divisional Officer, Tirupathi, Chittoor District.

4. The Tahsildar, Tirupathi (Urban) Mandal, Tirupathi, Chittoor District.

...RESPONDENTS

Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India is filed prayingthat in the circumstances stated^ in, the affidavit filed therewith, the HighCourt may be pleased to issue a Writ, Order or direction more particularly oneinthenatureof WRIT OF MANDAMUSdeclaringtheactionofrespondent no.4 in interfering with the possession and enjoyment of thepetitioner with reference to land admeasuring Acs.0.37 centsin SurveyNo.698/2 of Tirupathi Village, Chandragiri Taluk, Chittoor District whichwasassignedin favour of the writ petitioner vide D.K.T. Patta No.314/4/1385dated 14.09.1975, without following due process of law, being bad, illegal,arbitrary, discriminatory and offerice Articles 14 & 300-A of Constitution ofIndia and consequentially to direct the respondents 2 to 4 not to interferewith the possession and enjoyment of the petitioner without following dueprocess of law.

lA NO: 1 OF 20227'

Petitionunder Section151 CPCisfiledprayingthatinthecircumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the HighCourt may be pleased to direct the respondents 2 to 4 not to interferewiththepossessionandenjoymentof thepetitioner withreferencelandadmeasuringAcs.0.37centsinSurvey No.698/2of TirupathiVillage,Chandragiri Taluk, Chittoor District which was assigned in favour of the writpetitioner vide D.K.T. Patta No.3i4/4/1385 dated 14.09.1975.

Counsel for the Petitioner(s):SRI. VENKATASUBBAIAH V

Counsel for the Respondents: GP FOR REVENUE

The Court made the following

APHCI)10214132022

ilLiirilCOURT OF ANDHRA PRADESHAT AMARAVATi[3505](Special Original Jurisdiction)

WEDNESDAY .THE TWENTY SIXTH DAY OF MARCHTWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE

PRESENT

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE T.C.D.SEKHAR

WRIT PETITION NO: 12668/2022

Between:

P Kanneyya

...PETITIONER

AND

The State Of Andhra Pradesh and Others

...RESPONDENT(S)

Counsel for the Petitioner:

1. VENKATASUBBAIAH V

Counsel for the Respondent(S):

1. GP FOR REVENUE

The Court made the following order:

1. The petitioner claims that he was issued DKT pattavide proceedings No.314/4/1385, dated 14.09.1975 in[respect][ of]land admeasuring an extent of Acs.0.37 cents in Sy.No.698/2[of]Tirupathi Village, Chandragiri Taluk, Chittoor District.vide proceedings No.314/4/1385, dated 14.09.1975 in[respect][ of]land admeasuring an extent of Acs.0.37 cents in Sy.No.698/2[of]Tirupathi Village, Chandragiri Taluk, Chittoor District.

2. It is further case of the petitioner that since then[he]has been in peaceful possession and enjoyment of the[subject]lands and eking out livelihood by cultivating the same.It is furtherstated that his name was mutated in revenue records[and][ he][ was]issued pattadar passbooks.It is further case of the[petitioner][ that]he alsopaidland revenue. Along with thewritpetition,thepetitioner hasfiled copiesof DKTpatta,pattadar[passbooks,]Adangals and receipts of payment of land revenue in[respect][ of]subject land.

3. Itisthe caseof thepetitioner that whileso,on19.04.2022 respondents 2 to 4 have entered into the[lands][ of][ the]petitioner and started taking measurements, when the[same][ was]questioned by him,he was informedthat the subject[land]isrequired for allotment of house sites to the eligible[beneficiaries.]As the respondents tried to interfere with the possession[of][ the]

petitioner without issuing any notice and without following[due]process of law, the petitioner approached this Court by filing theinstant writ petition.

4. The 4*^ respondent-Tahsildar filed counter affidavitstating that there was no record available in his office evidencingthat the DKT patta issued in favor of the petitioner.Itis furtherstated that the petitioner is not a resident of Tirupati Village and atpresent, he is residing at Thayyuru village of S.R.Puram Mandal,Chittoor District, whichisat about 60 kms from Tirupati.Itisfurther contended that the DKT patta relied on by the petitioner isfake andconcocteddocument.Itisfurtherstatedthat,thepetitioner is not in possession of the land in dispute. The subjectland is classified as AWD as per revenue records andit is vestedwith the Government. Therefore, the question of interfering[with]the possession of the petitioner does not arise.It is also statedthatthe4threspondentissuednoticesinForm-1dated30.04.2022, 20.05.2022 and 17.06.2022 asking the petitioner[to]appear before him along with the original record to[substantiate]his right over the subject lands.It is further averred that despiteissuance of notices the petitioner did not choose to appear beforethe 4**^ respondent thereby it is presumed that the petitioner doesstating that there was no record available in his office evidencingthat the DKT patta issued in favor of the petitioner.Itis furtherstated that the petitioner is not a resident of Tirupati Village and atpresent, he is residing at Thayyuru village of S.R.Puram Mandal,Chittoor District, whichisat about 60 kms from Tirupati.Itisfurther contended that the DKT patta relied on by the petitioner isfake andconcocteddocument.Itisfurtherstatedthat,thepetitioner is not in possession of the land in dispute. The subjectland is classified as AWD as per revenue records andit is vestedwith the Government. Therefore, the question of interfering[with]the possession of the petitioner does not arise.It is also statedthatthe4threspondentissuednoticesinForm-1dated30.04.2022, 20.05.2022 and 17.06.2022 asking the petitioner[to]appear before him along with the original record to[substantiate]his right over the subject lands.It is further averred that despiteissuance of notices the petitioner did not choose to appear beforethe 4**^ respondent thereby it is presumed that the petitioner does not have valid documents in support of his case and prayed todismiss the writ petition.

5. Thepetitionerfiledreplyaffidavitdenyingtheaverments madein the counter affidavit and reiterated the factthat the 4'*^ respondent without even looking into[the][ records][ or]callingfor the records from erstwhile ChandragiriTaluk,filedcounter affidavit by denying the DKT patta issued in[his][ favour.]averments madein the counter affidavit and reiterated the factthat the 4'*^ respondent without even looking into[the][ records][ or]callingfor the records from erstwhile ChandragiriTaluk,filedcounter affidavit by denying the DKT patta issued in[his][ favour.]

Conclusion

6. Heard Sri V.Venugopal Rao, learned Senior CounselrepresentingonbehalfofSriV.VenkataSubbaiah,learnedcounselforthepetitioner andlearned Assistant GovernmentPleader for Revenue appearing for the respondents.representingonbehalfofSriV.VenkataSubbaiah,learnedcounselforthepetitioner andlearned Assistant GovernmentPleader for Revenue appearing for the respondents.

7. Perused the material available on record.

8. On perusal of the affidavit filed in support of the[writ]petition and the documents filed along with the same,it wouldclearly establish that the petitioner was assigned DKT patta for anextent of Ac.0.37 centsin Sy.No.698/2 of Tirupathi Village byproceedings dated14.09.1975.Further,the respondentsalsoissuedpattadar passbook by dulymutating the nameofthepetitioner in revenue records. The said factum of issuance of DKTpatta and mutation of name of the petitioner is not denied by thepetition and the documents filed along with the same,it wouldclearly establish that the petitioner was assigned DKT patta for anextent of Ac.0.37 centsin Sy.No.698/2 of Tirupathi Village byproceedings dated14.09.1975.Further,the respondentsalsoissuedpattadar passbook by dulymutating the nameofthepetitioner in revenue records. The said factum of issuance of DKTpatta and mutation of name of the petitioner is not denied by the respondentsintheircounteraffidavitexpectstatingthattherecords pertaining to the land in question are not[available][ in][ the]office of the 4'^^ respondent.

9. Further, as on the date of assignment, the subjectland was situated within the jurisdiction of erstwhile ChandragiriTaluk. The counteraffidavitisfiledby the Tahsildar,TirupatiUrban Mandal in view of the fact that presently the subject land isunder the jurisdiction of therespondent. On a reading[of][ the]averments made in the counter affidavit,it is succinctly[clear][ that]the 4'*^ respondent did not make any effort to see[that][ records][ are]called for from erstwhile Chandragiri Taluk nor it[is][ averred][ that]he has undertaken such effort before making such statement[in]thecounteraffidavit.Therefore,thecontentionofthe4threspondent that the DKT patta issued in favour of the petitioner isfake and fabricated, cannot be believed for the reason[that][ the]petitioner has filed all the documents to show that[he][ was][ issued]the same and his name was also mutated in revenue records andproof evidencing the same is also filed along with the writ petition.land was situated within the jurisdiction of erstwhile ChandragiriTaluk. The counteraffidavitisfiledby the Tahsildar,TirupatiUrban Mandal in view of the fact that presently the subject land isunder the jurisdiction of therespondent. On a reading[of][ the]averments made in the counter affidavit,it is succinctly[clear][ that]the 4'*^ respondent did not make any effort to see[that][ records][ are]called for from erstwhile Chandragiri Taluk nor it[is][ averred][ that]he has undertaken such effort before making such statement[in]thecounteraffidavit.Therefore,thecontentionofthe4threspondent that the DKT patta issued in favour of the petitioner isfake and fabricated, cannot be believed for the reason[that][ the]petitioner has filed all the documents to show that[he][ was][ issued]the same and his name was also mutated in revenue records andproof evidencing the same is also filed along with the writ petition.

10. It is pertinent to mention that as the 4*^ respondenttriedtointerfere with the possessionof thepetitioner’slandwithout issuing any notice, the present writ petitionis filed and curiouslythe4*^respondentissuednoticeinForm-1dated30.04.2022, 20.05.2022 and 17.06.2022 asking the petitioner[to]appear before him along with all original documents[in][ support][ of]hisclaim. Whenthematterispendingadjudication,the4threspondent issued the above notices.It is further[averred]in thecounter affidavit that in view of the fact that the petitioner did notappear before him in pursuance of the said notice,[he][ presumed]that the petitioner does not have any valid documents[in][ support]of his claim. As already noted supra, along with the[writ][ petition,]thepetitioner filedall the documents showing the[factum]ofissuance of DKT patta in his favour and also the revenue[records]reflecting his name. Despite the same, the 4*^ respondent[has]statedinthecounteraffidavitthatthepetitionerhasnothdocuments in support of his claim. The said averment[by][ the][ 4]respondentis without any merit or substance.Thereforenocredence can be given the said averments.

11. ThisCourt,while orderingnoticeby order dated06.05.2022, directed the parties to maintain status[quo][ existing][ as]on that day and the same is extended from time to time[and]it issubsisting till today.06.05.2022, directed the parties to maintain status[quo][ existing][ as]on that day and the same is extended from time to time[and]it issubsisting till today.

12.

12. In view of the reasons recorded supra, the WritPetitionis allowed directing the respondents not to dispossessthe petitioner except in accordance with law.It is further madeclear that if the respondents want to initiate any action, the samehas to be done after putting the petitioner on notice.Petitionis allowed directing the respondents not to dispossessthe petitioner except in accordance with law.It is further madeclear that if the respondents want to initiate any action, the samehas to be done after putting the petitioner on notice.

13. Accordingly, the Writ Petition is allowed. There shallbe no order as to costs.

As a sequel. Miscellaneous Applications,if any, pendingshall also stand dismissed.

To

Sd/- K TATA RAODEPUTY REGISTRAR//TRUE COPY//

SE^ON OFFICER

1. ThePrincipalSecretary,StateofAndhraPradesh.RevenueDepartment, Secretariat, at Velagapudi, Amaravathi, Guntur[ District.]Department, Secretariat, at Velagapudi, Amaravathi, Guntur[ District.]

2. The District Collector, Chittoor, Chittoor District.

3. The Revenue Divisional Officer, Tirupathi, Chittoor[District.]

4. The Tahsildar, Tirupathi (Urban) Mandal, Tirupathi,[Chittoor][ District.]

5. One CC to SRI VENKATASUBBAIAH V Advocate [OPUC]

6. Two CCs to GP FOR REVENUE, High Court of Andhra Pradesh [OUT]

7. Three CD Copies

HIGH COURT

DATED:26/03/2025

ORDER

WP.No.12668 of 2022

THE WRIT PETITION IS ALLOWED WITHOUT COSTS