APHC010313192019 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI THURSDAY,THE ELEVENTH DAY OF DECEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE GANNAMANENI RAMAKRISHNA PRASAD CONTEMPT CASE NO: 777 OF 2019 Between:

1. K RAJAMMA, W/o. Kondaiah Naidu, Aged 63 years, Cultivation, R/o.

Bodipativaripalle Village, Rompicherla Mandal, Chittoor District ...Petitioner AND

1. SRI MANMOHAN SINGH, I.A.S. Principal Secretary, Revenue Department Secretariat Buildings, Velagapudi, Amaravathi, Guntur District.

2. Sri Narayana bharath Gupta, I.A.5. District Collector, Collectorate Building, Chittoor, Chittoor District.

3. Ms K Vetri Selvi, , I.A.S. Sub-Collector, Madanapalle, Chittoor District.

4. Ms M R Bhagyalakshmi, Tahsildar/Mandal Revenue Officer, Chinnagottigallu, Chittoor District

5. Sei Venkateswar I A S, Dostrict Collector, Collectrorate, Tirupati, Tirupati District.

6. Sri Ram Mohan, R.D.O., R.D.O.Office, Tirupati, Tirupati District

7. K P Bhaagya Lakshmi, Tahsuldar / MRO, M.R.O.Officer, Chinnagottigallu MAndal, Tirupati District RR 5 to 7 are impleaded as per Court order dt.28.08.2025 Vide IA No.1 of 2025 in CC No.777 of 2019 ...Respondents Counsel for the Petitioner: DEVI PRASAD MANGALAPURI Counsel for the Respondents: P SUBASH Counsel for the Respondents:SUSHMA YAGANTI The Court made the following ORAL ORDER:

Heard Sri N. Subba Rao, learned Senior Counsel appearing on behalf of Sri M. Devi Prasad, learned Counsel for the Contempt Petitioner, Sri P. Subash, learned Counsel for the Respondent Nos.1 to 4 and Ms. P. Usha, learned Counsel appearing on behalf of Smt. Sushma Yaganti, learned Counsel for the Respondent Nos. 5 to 7.

2. The present Contempt Case is filed complaining the inaction on the part of the Respondents with respect to the Order passed by the Learned Single Judge dated 09.04.2019 in W.P.No.4858 of 2019. As on the date of filing of the present Contempt Case, admittedly, the Respondents did not act as per the directions rendered by this Hon’ble Court in the above mentioned Order. The operative portion of the Order dated 09.04.2019 in W.P.No.4858 of 2019 of this Court is usefully extracted hereunder:

“Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, submissions of the learned counsel and on perusal of the record, this Court fails to understand why pattadar passbook and title deed are not issued so far, in spite of proper application submitted by the petitioner. The inaction on the part of the respondents to consider the said application has driven the petitioner to this Court. Hence, this Court felt it appropriate to dispose of the writ petition directing the respondents to consider the application, dated 06.03.2019, submitted by the petitioner through online for issuance of pattadar passbook and title deed and pass appropriate orders as per law as expeditiously as possible not later than two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order and communicate the same to the petitioner.”

3. The Respondent No.3 has filed the Counter Affidavit in the present Contempt Case and along with the Counter Affidavit, the said Respondent has annexed a Proceeding issued by the Tahsildar dated 10.06.2019 stating that the request of the Petitioner is not practically possible, as the request could not be complied with since the lateral grant was ordered and Pattadar Pass Book was issued in favour of the subsequent assignee who is in possession of the land. The Petitioner herein has came to know about the issuance of this Order passed by the Tahsildar of Chinnagottigallu Mandalam on 10.06.2019 only when the Petitioner has seen the Counter Affidavit filed on 04.08.2022.

4. It is submitted by the learned Senior Counsel that the Petitioner has submitted an RTI Application to furnish the proof of serving of such Order dated 10.06.2019 passed by the Tahsildar of Chinnagottigallu Mandalam. The Respondents have replied that, since the Petitioner has declined to accept the said Order, the same was pasted on the house of t