ORDER :

1. This writ petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking the following relief:

“....to issue a Writ Order or Direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus, declaring the action of Respondents 2 to 4 in not deleting the land of the petitioner admeasuring Ac. 1.69 cents in Sy No. 409-C and Ac. 0.31 cents in Sy No. 409-E, total admeasuring Ac. 2.00 cents of land in Rajupalem Village, Martur Mandal, Prakasam District from the List of Prohibited Properties in spite of orders of the District Collector in Proceedings E. No. E5/268550/2020 dated 09.11.2020 and Proceedings E. No. E5/267427/2020 dated 26.01.2021 and 04.05.2021 and also trying to dispossess the petitioner from the subject land and proposing to allot the land to poor persons under the Navaratnalu Scheme, as illegal, arbitrary, violative of principles of natural justice and violative of Articles 14, 19(1)(g), 21 and 300-A of the Constitution of India and consequently direct Respondent No. 4 to delete the land of petitioner from the List of Prohibited Properties and pass such other order...”

2. The petitioner is the absolute owner and possessor of agricultural land admeasuring Ac. 1.69 cents in Sy. No. 409-C and Ac. 0.31 cents in Sy. No. 409-E, total admeasuring Ac. 2.00 cents of land in Rajupalem Village, Martur Mandal, Prakasam District and the same property was devolved upon him after death of his ancestors, which was acquired under a registered partition deed took place in the year 1957. The petitioner's father and brothers have divided the properties under registered a partition deed, dated 17.09.1957. By virtue of the said partition, the petitioner himself and his brothers viz. Veeraiah, Pedda Venkateswarlu, Chinna Venkateswarlu got 1/3rd extent in northern side Ac. 7.06 cents out of Ac. 14.12 cents bearing Sy. Nos. 409/B and 409/D of Rajupalem Village, Martur Mandal, Prakasam District. The petitioner's family has also surrendered the excess land before Land Ceiling Authorities vide File No. CC/685/ADK/75. The petitioner's land was also included in the list of prohibited property notified under Section 22-A of the Act. Hence, he filed an application for deletion of the subject property from the List of Prohibited Properties.

3. On the application of petitioner, the District Collector addressed a letter to the Tahsildar, 4th respondent herein on 09.11.2020 and 04.05.2021 directing him to send revised list of properties notified under Section 22-A of the Act, but “the 4th respondent did not take any action so far. Therefore, the inaction on the part of 4th respondent is now questioned before this Court in the present writ petition in compliance of the direction issued by the 2nd respondent against the 4th respondent in view of the representation submitted by the petitioner to delete the land from the list under Section 22-A of the Act.

4. Learned Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue on instructions in writing from the Tahsildar's office submitted that the land in dispute is a dotted land. An application has to be made to the competent authority for deletion of the land from the dotted lands list in RSR as per the provisions of the Act. But, application was made to the District Collector, who in turn addressed a letter referred above to the Tahsildar. Therefore in the absence of any application to the Tahsildar as per the provisions of Pradesh Dotted Lands (Updation in Re-Settlement Register) Act, 2017 4th respondent is not under obligation to send the revised list to be notified under Section 22-A of the Act. The learned Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue also relied on the order passe by this Court in W.P. No. 1583 of 2020, dated 28.01.2020. Based on the law declared by this Court, the learned Assistant Government Pleader requested to dismiss the writ petition.

5. During hearing, Sri. P.S.P. Suresh Kumar, learned counsel for the petitioner reiterated the contentions urged in the petition. Whereas, learned Ass