SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2025 Supreme(AP) 521

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI
R.RAGHUNANDAN RAO, T.C.D.SEKHAR, JJ.
E Rajagopal Reddy, S/o. Late L. Venkata Reddy - Appellant 
Versus 
The State Of Andhra Pradesh - Respondent  
Writ Appeal Nos. 544 & 563 of 2025
Decided on : 22-08-2025

Advocates Appeared:
For the Appellant : M VENKATA RAMANA REDDY
For the Respondent: POTHAM VENGALA REDDY SC For M.Corporation in Rayalaseema region, KALYAN CHAKRAVARTHY R, GP FOR REVENUE, GALLA SUDARSANA RAO, C HARI PREETH

Rights to land under the Andhra Pradesh Estates Abolition Act require proof of continuous possession and corresponding applications for Ryotwari pattas pre-dating the act's enactment.

Headnote:(A) Andhra Pradesh (Andhra Area) Estates (Abolition and Conversion into Ryotwari) Act, 1948 - Applicability pertaining to lands classified as assessed waste dry - Claims for Ryotwari pattas must be supported by evidence of prior possession and applications. (Para 14)

(B) Legal heirs and purchasers must substantiate their claim through historical documentation demonstrating continuous possession prior to the Act's enactment. (Paras 15-20)

(C) Absence of evidence or pending applications prevents the Court from granting relief, emphasizing the need for meticulous record-keeping and procedural compliance. (Paras 22-24)

Facts of the case:
The appellants claim ownership of land in Daminedu Village based on historical claims and subsequent unsuccessful applications for Ryotwari pattas, contesting a rejection by authorities based on alleged errors in earlier surveys. (Paras 4-5)

Findings of Court:
The Court found no substantiated claims of possession or any pending applications for Ryotwari pattas, affirming the lower Court's dismissal of the petitions. (Paras 6-8)

Issues: The primary issues included the legitimacy of the appellant's claims to ownership, the evidential sufficiency of historical documents, and the procedural integrity in claiming Ryotwari pattas. (Paras 9-12)

Ratio Decidendi: The Court ruled that claims for Ryotwari pattas necessitate demonstrable evidence of possession pre-dating the 1948 Act and found the evidence presented by the appellants insufficient to support their claims. (Paras 14-21)

Result: Writ Appeals dismissed.

Table of Content
1. facts regarding land claims and surveys. (Para 3 , 4)
2. respondents' counterarguments regarding land claims. (Para 5)
3. arguments by appellants regarding evidence. (Para 9 , 10 , 11 , 12 , 13)
4. court’s analysis on the validity of land claims. (Para 14 , 15 , 16 , 17 , 18 , 19 , 20 , 21 , 22 , 23)
5. final decision to dismiss the writ appeals. (Para 24)

JUDGMENT :

As these two Writ Appeals arise out of a common order and since the parties and the issues raised in both these Writ Appeals are common, they are being disposed of, by way of this common Judgment.

2. Heard Sri P. Veera Reddy, learned Senior Counsel appearing for Sri M. Venkata Ramana Reddy, learned counsel for the appellants and Smt. S. Pranathi, learned Special Government Pleader appearing from the office of the learned Advocate General for the official respondents.

3. The facts, in the present cases, have been extensively set out in the order of the learned Single Judge and we do not propose to set out the facts, in extenso, in this order also. However, a few facts are required to be set out before considering the contentions raised by either side.

4. The facts according to the appellants are as follows:

a) The appellants claim to be either legal heirs or purchasers of persons, who were in occupation and enjoyment of various extents of land, in Sy.Nos.46-57, 173-182, 211, 192-207 of Daminedu Village, Tirupati Rural Mandal, Chittoor District. The total extent of these lands is Ac.175.00.

b) Daminedu Village is an Inam village, falling within the ambit of Andhra Pradesh (Andhra Area) Estates (Abolition and Conversion into Ryotwari) Act, 1948 (here-in-after referred to as “the Act”). This village was surveyed in the year 1961. As there were a few errors in the survey, a fresh survey was again conducted in the years 2006 and 2009.

c) The predecessors of the appellants are said to have filed claims before the Settlement Officer, under the Act and these have remained pending. Apart from this, the appellants 22, 23 & 26 in W.A.No.563 of 2025 are said to have filed claim applications before the Settlement Officer for grant of Ryotwari pattas. However, these applications were rejected by an order, dated 24.05.2008, bearing L.Dis.No.F6/557/08, on the ground that the applications, which had been filed after 24.04.1983, cannot be considered. The appellants are said to have filed various representations before the Chief Commissioner of Land Administration as well as the Hon’ble Chief Minister and the Hon’ble Ministers, for orders being passed on the pending applications, for grant of Ryotwari pattas and directions had been issued to the Revenue Authorities to undertake such an exercise.

d) The lands under the possession and cultivation of the appellants, was classified, by mistake, as “Assessed Waste Dry” lands, in the survey conducted in the year 1961. When this mistake was pointed out, a fresh survey was conducted in the year 2006 and repeated in the year 2009. The records of the survey, conducted in the year 2009, would show that the appellants herein were in possession and enjoyment of the lands. As no steps were being taken to process the applications, for grant of Ryotwari pattas, the appellants in W.A.No.563 of 2025, had approached the erstwhile High Court of Andhra Pradesh, by way of W.P.No.1499 of 2010, for a direction to the Revenue Authorities to act in accordance with the memo No.52300/JA-2/2008-1, dated 17.10.2008 and consequently, pass orders for issuance of Ryotwari pattas in favour of the appellants.

e) The Authorities, even while the applications of the appellants were pending, had transferred and handed over Ac.35.53 cents of land situated in some of the survey numbers, mentioned above, to the A.P. State Housing Corporation Limited and subsequently, to Tirupati Municipal Corporation, which is impermissible and to set aside memo No.APSHL/Land Allocation/2008, dated 15.06.2009, under which the land had been transferred.

5. The Revenue Authorities filed co

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

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

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top