ORDER:

Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue appearing for respondent Nos.1 to 3. Notice to the 4th respondent is deemed not necessary, as the writ petition is being disposed of, without going into merits of the case, at the stage of admission.

2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that originally the land of an extent of Acs.3.00 in Survey No.13–1A of Maravapalli Agraharam was assigned to the petitioner’s father- in-law vide D.A.R. Dis.No.1264 of 1979 along with the others. He submits that after expiry of the petitioner’s father-in-law, the Revenue Authorities have mutated the name of the petitioner in the Revenue Records in respect of the above said land and issued Pattadar Pass Book and Title Deed in favour of the petitioner. Learned counsel submits that the petitioner reliably learnt that the 4th respondent is making efforts to get the subject matter land mutated in her name and the Authorities concerned i.e., the 3rd respondent is bent upon to accede to 4th respondent’s request. Learned counsel submits that the A.P. Rights in Land and Pattadar Pass Books Act, 1971 (for short, the PPB Act) contemplates the procedure for mutation and updation of the Revenue Records and the petitioner apprehends that without following the procedure contemplated under the PPB Act, the application/request of the 4th respondent for mutation is likely to be accepted, in the event of which, the petitioner would suffer serious prejudice and irreparable loss. He submits that the petitioner, having left with no other efficacious remedy, approached this Court seeking appropriate directions.

3. Learned Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue, on the other hand, submits that the writ petition is misconceived and filed only on mere apprehension and the same, as such, cannot be entertained. He further submits that if any application is made for mutation of the Revenue Records in respect of the subject matter land, the Authorities concerned would follow the provisions of the PPB Act and issue notices for which the petitioner has to submit her objections, if any, in terms of the Rules framed under the PPB Act. Making the said submissions, learned Assistant Government Pleader seeks to dismiss the writ petition.

4. This Court has considered the submissions made and perused the material on record, including the latest Adangals wherein the name of the petitioner is reflected in the relevant columns. Be that as it may. As pointed out by the learned Assistant Government Pleader, it appears that the petitioner had filed the present writ petition on mere apprehension, however, as the PPB Act contemplates the procedure with regard to updation of Revenue Records, this Court deems it appropriate to dispose of the writ petition, with an observation that in the event any application is filed for mutation of the Revenue Records and issuance of the PPB/TD in respect of the land in question, the 3rd respondent shall strictly follow the provisions of the PPB Act, as amended by Act 15 of 2022, and the relevant Rules, after giving opportunity to the petitioner as also the 5th respondent.

5. With the above observations, the writ petition is disposed of. No order as to costs. Miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shall stand closed.

________________________ NINALA JAYASURYA, J August 22, 2023.

vasu