Parre Pitchaiah, v. State Of Andhra Pradesh, Rep. By Its Principal Secretary

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, AT HYDERABAD

FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA & THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH **** HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE P. NAVEEN RAO WRIT PETITION NO. 26294 OF 2017 DATE : 07.08.2017 Between:

Parre Pitchaiah S/o Kondaiah ....petitioner A n d State of Andhra Pradesh, represented by its Principal Secretary to Government, Revenue Department and two others ....Respondents

HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE P. NAVEEN RAO WRIT PETITION NO. 26294 OF 2017 ORDER:

Petitioner claims to be the owner and in possession and enjoyment of agricultural land admeasuring Ac. 5.00 in S.No. 225/14 of Kalavalla Revenue Village, Voletivaripalem Mandal, Prakasam District. According to petitioner, it was assigned to him and ever since he is in possession and enjoyment. Petitioner applied on the website of the State in Form 6-A, on 16.3.2017 to grant E-pattadar pass book -cum- Title deed and for mutation of his name in all Online Land Revenue Records under Section 4(1) of Andhra Pradesh Rights in Land and Pattadar Pass Books Act, 1971. Petitioner was served with endorsement dated 27.3.2017 rejecting his application and the said rejection is assailed in the Writ Petition. 2.

Learned counsel appearing for petitioner submits that the rejection order was passed without assigning due reasons and on that ground it is liable to be set aside.

3.

Prima facie reading of the order cannot be said that no reasons are assigned. According to Tahsildar (3rd respondent), as per DK register available in his office there is no S.No. 225/14 in Kalavalla Village, Valetivaripalem Mandal.

4.

Against the rejection order, aggrieved person has a statutory remedy of appeal to the Appellate authority under Section 5(5) of the Act. Without availing the said remedy, this Writ Petition is filed. 5.

The remedy provided by the Act in the form of appeal is a valuable and efficacious right vested in aggrieved person. When the aggrieved person has efficacious remedy available under the Statute, this Court is not inclined to entertain the Writ Petition.

6.

Accordingly, the Writ Petition is dismissed granting liberty to avail the remedy of appeal, if the petitioner is aggrieved by the order passed by the Tahsildar (3rd respondent). There shall be no order as to costs. As a sequel thereto, miscellaneous petitions, pending if any, shall stand closed. ______________________ P. NAVEEN RAO, J Date: 07.08.2017 KA