Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI
K. Manmadha Rao, J.
Randhi Sridhar Prabhu – Petitioner
Versus
The State of Andhra Pradesh and Ors. –Respondents
Writ Petition Nos. 6384 and 15878 of 2023
Decided On : 18-06-2024
(A) Constitution of India - Article 226 - Andhra Pradesh Rights in Land and Pattadar Pass Book Act, 1971 - Writ petitions challenging the rejection of requests for cancellation of pattadar passbooks and issuance of title deeds - The court held that the petitioner must pursue available remedies under the Act before approaching the court - The right of appeal must find its source in legislative authority, and the remedy of appeal against mere issuance of pattadar passbook is not provided under the Act. (Paras 9, 10, 11, 12, 18)
(B) Natural Justice - The requirement of issuing notice to all interested parties is a fundamental aspect of natural justice applicable in administrative proceedings. (Paras 10, 11)
Facts of the case:
The petitioner claims rights over properties bequeathed to him under a registered will after the death of his adoptive parents, while the 3rd respondent claims ownership through a gift deed and pattadar passbook issued in his favor.
Findings of Court:
The court found that the petitioner did not take necessary legal steps within the prescribed time and directed the respondents to make necessary entries in the dispute register regarding the subject land until the legal proceedings are resolved.
Issues: The main issues were the validity of the pattadar passbooks issued to the 3rd respondent and the procedural requirements for cancellation of such records.
Ratio Decidendi: The court ruled that the petitioner must exhaust available remedies under the Act before seeking judicial intervention, emphasizing the importance of following statutory procedures for appeals and the necessity of notice in administrative actions.
Result: Writ petitions disposed of by a common order.
ORDER :
K. Manmadha Rao, J.
1. Writ Petition No. 6384 of 2023 is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for the following relief:-
Writ Petition No. 15878 of 2023 is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for the following relief:-
"to issue an order direction or writ more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the 2nd respondent in proposing to incorporate the name of the 4th respondent in the revenue records and proposed to issue pattadar passbooks and Title Deeds for the land in Sy.No.29, 77, 119/3, 102, 23/11/1B and 103 respectively to an extent of Ac 0.39 cents, Ac.2.17 cents, Ac 0.06 cents, Ac.0.29 cents, Ac.0.66 cents, Ac.1.16 cents and Ac.0.07 cents respectively totalling Ac.4.80 cents of Nunaparthi Village, Achuthapuram Mandal, Anakapalli District, without notice, without enquiry to the petitioner, and contrary to the provisions of Andhra Pradesh Rights in Land and Pattadar Pass Books Act, 1971, when the W.P.No.6384 of 2023 is pending on the file of the Hon'ble High Court, A.P at Amaravati for the very same subject property is highly illegal, arbitrary, unconstitutional, violative of Articles 14 and 300-A of the Constitution of India, and consequently direct the 2nd respondent not to incorporate the name of the 4th respondent in the revenue records and proposed to issue Pattadar Pass Books and Title Deeds for the land in Sy.No.29, 77, 119/3, 102, 23/11/1B and 103 respectively to an extent of Ac 0.39 cents, Ac.2.17 cents, Ac 0.06 cents, Ac.0.29 cents, Ac.0.66 cents, Ac.1.16 cents and Ac.0.07 cents respectively totalling Ac.4.80 cents of Nunaparthi Village, Achuthapuram Mandal, Anakapalli District and pass such other order or orders……."
2. Since the facts and issue involved in both the Writ Petitions, I find it expedient to decide these matters by a Common Order.
3. The precise case of the petitioner in both the writ petitions is that one Sri Rama Chandra Rao and his wife Randhi Parvathi have adopted the petitioner as their son. While so, on 23.07.1997 the mother of the petitioner by name Randhi Parvathamma died intestate. The father of the petitioner have executed a Registered Will dated 11.06.1998 (Doc.No.230/98) in favour of the petitioner bequeathing his various properties owned by him in favour of petitioner including the subject lands. Subsequently, the father of the petitioner died on 16.07.2021, since then the petitioner is in physical possession and enjoyment of the properties bequeathed upon him under the Will executed by his father. Subsequently, the petitioner made an application to the 2nd respondent requesting to mutate the name of the peti
The court emphasized the necessity of exhausting statutory remedies before seeking judicial intervention in land disputes, affirming that the right of appeal must be explicitly provided by law.
Revenue authorities may not adjudicate on civil title disputes under A.P. Rights in Land and Pattadar Pass Books Act; parties should approach civil court for resolution.
THE REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER HAS NO JURISDICTION TO ENTERTAIN A REPRESENTATION QUESTIONING THE MUTATION OF NAMES IN REVENUE RECORDS WITHOUT AN APPEAL BEING FILED UNDER SECTION 5(5) OF THE ROR ACT.
The court emphasized that pattadar passbooks must be issued only after valid mutation proceedings, and any orders issued without such proceedings are void.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
