Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI
B KRISHNA MOHAN
K. Radhakrishna, S/O K.Venkata Subba Naidu – Appellant
Versus
State Of Andhra Pradesh, Rep. By Principal Secretary, Revenue Department – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. court's procedural observations and directives. (Para 1 , 4 , 15) |
| 2. dispute over land ownership and title validity. (Para 2 , 3 , 5 , 6) |
| 3. arguments regarding jurisdiction of revenue authorities. (Para 7 , 8) |
| 4. consideration of legal remedies and rights. (Para 12 , 13 , 14) |
| 5. conclusion of the judgment with directions. (Para 16) |
ORDER :
B Krishna Mohan, J.
Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners, the learned Assistant Government Pleader appearing for the respondent Nos.1 to 3 and the learned counsel for the respondent Nos.4 to 9. The respondent No.10 is the writ petitioner in the second writ petition i.e., W.P.No.7353 of 2021.
2. This writ petition i.e., W.P.No.5678 of 2021 was filed questioning the orders D.Dis.1189/2019/G, dated 17.02.2021 passed by the 2nd respondent as contrary to Section 5 (3) of A.P.Rights in Land and Pattadar Pass Books Act, 1971 and Rule 19(2) of Rules thereunder and contrary to the Full Bench judgment of the erstwhile High Court reported in 2007 (6) ALT 134 and the other decisions in 2015 (6) ALD 609 (DB).
3. The second writ petition i.e., W.P.No.7353 of 2021 was filed by the vendor of the petitioners in W.P.No.5678 of 2021 questioning
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 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.
Pursuant to the A.P. Rights in Land & Pattadar Passbooks Act, cancellation of title deeds without proper notice is illegal, necessitating remand for reconsideration under due process.
The court emphasized that pattadar passbooks must be issued only after valid mutation proceedings, and any orders issued without such proceedings are void.
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.
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
