IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI
D. RAMESH, J.
Thontla Masthan Reddy - Appellant
Versus
The State of Andhra Pradesh - Respondent
Writ Petition No. 23506 of 2020
Decided On : 10-12-2020
Constitution of India,1950 - Article 226 - Andhra Pradesh Record of Rights in Land and Pattadar Pass Books Act, 1971 - Section 5 - Deed-cum-e-passbook - Mutation - Petitioner was absolute owner of agricultural land in an extent situated at Village, which was obtained by petitioner through registered sale deed vide document from its rightful owner - Thereafter a self-declaration was made and modification deed was executed on before respondent no. 2 office as schedule was wrongly mentioned and correct schedule was mentioned in modification deed which was entered in Book-IV by concerned with specific boundaries as such sale deed executed in his favour has been corrected by way of amendment petitioner made an application for mutation of his name in revenue records under vide application in prescribed proforma - Though application was made, 4th respondent did not take any steps in matter –
Finding of the court : Against every order of either making an amendment in record of rights or refusing to make such an amendment, [an appeal shall lie to the Revenue Divisional Officer or such authority as may be prescribed], within a period of sixty days from date of communication of said order and decision of appellate authority thereon shall subject to provisions of Section 9, be final - Property is acquired, it is only an intimation to concerned authorities for registration and mutation of properties in the name of the petitioner and to issue pattadar pass book. In view of the above submissions and as per Section 5 of Andhra Pradesh Record of Rights in Land and Pattadar Pass Books Act, 1971 the Act, the authorities shall carry out amendments in the Records of Rights –
Result : writ petition is disposed
ORDER :
D. Ramesh, J.
1. The Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of Constitution of India seeking to declare the action of the respondent no. 4 in not entertaining document for mutation and not issuing title deed-cum-e-passbook despite the petitioner's application no. RMU012005308354 dated 30.9.2020 in respect of the land to an extent of Ac.0.35 cents in Sy. No. 23/1 situated at Yerragondapalem Village and Mandal, Prakasam District as illegal, arbitrary and consequently direct the respondent no. 4 to entertain mutation and to issue title deed-cum-e-passbook in favour of the petitioner.
2. The learned Counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the petitioner was the absolute owner of agricultural land in an extent of Ac.0.35 cents in Sy. No. 23/1 situated at Yerragondapalem Village, Yerragondapalem Mandal, Prakasam District which was obtained by the petitioner through registered sale deed vide document no. 2435 of 2019 on 31.8.2019 from its rightful owner. Thereafter a self-declaration was made and modification deed was executed on 17.3.2020 before respondent no. 2 office as the schedule was wrongly mentioned and correct schedule was mentioned in the modification deed which was entered in Book-IV by the concerned with specific boundaries as such the sale deed executed in his favour has been corrected by way of amendment. The petitioner made an application for mutation of his name in revenue records under the ROR Act 1971 on 30.9.2020 vide application no. RMU012005308354 in the prescribed proforma. Though the application was made, the 4th respondent did not take any steps in the matter.
3. The learned Counsel appearing for the petitioner has mainly contended and brought to the notice of the Court that as per Andhra Pradesh Record of Rights in Land and Pattadar Pass Books Act, 1971 in which section 5 reads as follows:
Provided that no order refusing to make an amendment in accordance with the intimation shall be passed unless the person making such intimation has been given an opportunity of making his representation in that behalf.
[Provided further that when the registration is approved by the Registering Officer, the name of the claimant shall be mutated in lieu of name of the executants on real time basis provisionally in electronically maintained data duly assigning notional subdivision number as may be prescribed pending enquiry by the Tahsildar;
Provided also that the provisional mutation shall be confirmed by the Tahsildar electronically by following due procedure under sub-section (3) within thirty days of the registration. The aggrieved person may file an appeal to the Revenue Divisional Officer within a period of fifteen days from the date of order of the Tahsildar and decision of the appellate authority thereon shall subject to the provisions of Section 9 be, final.].
(2) Where the [Mandal Revenue Officer] has reason to believe that an acquisition of any right of a description to which Section 4 applies has taken place and of which an intimation has not been made to him under that Section and where he considers that an amendment has to be effected in the record of rights, the [Mandal Revenue Officer] shall carry out the said amendment in the record of rights.
(3) The [Mandal Revenue Officer] shall, before carrying out any amendment in the record of rights under sub-section (1) or sub-section (2) issue a notice in writing to all persons whose names are entered in the record of rights and who are interested in or affected by the amendment and to any other persons whom he has reason to believe to be interested therein or affected t
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.