State's Officers Can't Use Administrative Powers To Compel Citizens To Abandon Pending Legal Proceedings: AP High Court

The Andhra Pradesh High Court has strongly deprecated the conduct of a Revenue Divisional Officer (RDO) who made the removal of land from the prohibited properties list conditional upon the petitioners withdrawing their pending writ petition, holding that executive authorities cannot use administrative powers to compel citizens to abandon judicial proceedings. [2026 LiveLaw (AP) 115]

The Court was dealing with a writ petition filed by purchasers of land challenging the continued inclusion of their property in the prohibited properties list under Section 22-A of the Registration Act, 1908 despite an earlier statutory order recognizing their title and possession.

Allowing the petition, Justice Sumathi Jagadam observed:

"This Court takes serious exception to the conduct of the Revenue Divisional Officer during the pendency of the present writ petition. The Revenue Divisional Officer removed Acs. 4.03 cents of land from the prohibitory list, but made such removal condition upon the petitioners withdrawing the present writ petition. Such action on the part of a statutory authority is wholly impermissible. Access to justice and the right to invoke the jurisdiction of this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India cannot be subjected to conditions imposed by executive authorities. The State and its officers cannot use administrative powers as a means to compel citizens to abandon pending legal proceedings." 

The petitioners contended that they had purchased the subject land through registered sale deeds and that despite an order under Section 4(2) of the Andhra Pradesh Land Reforms (Ceiling on Agricultural Holdings) Act, 1973, the land continued to remain in the prohibited properties list under Section 22-A of the Registration Act, 1908 preventing registration of documents relating to the property.

During the pendency of the writ petition, the Revenue Divisional Officer removed a portion of the land from the prohibited list but insisted that the petitioners first withdraw the pending writ petition to avail the benefit. 

The petitioners challenged the condition as an arbitrary exercise of executive power.

Rejecting the State's stand, the High Court held that the order passed under Section 4(2) was a valid exercise of statutory power and that, having recognized the petitioners' title and possession since 2011, the State could not continue to retain the land in the prohibited properties list.

Holding the condition to be wholly impermissible, the High Court observed that access to justice and the right to invoke the writ jurisdiction under Article 226 cannot be made subject to executive diktats, and that administrative authorities cannot use their statutory powers to compel or discourage citizens from pursuing constitutional remedies before the High Court.

Accordingly, the Court directed the District Collector to issue orders removing the petitioners' land from the prohibited properties list within eight weeks and directed the Sub-Registrar to register documents relating to the property in accordance with law upon such de-notification.

Case Title: Sree Teja and Tejasree Developers & Another v. State of Andhra Pradesh & Others

Case No.: Writ Petition No. 3076 of 2019

Counsel for the Petitioners: N. Ashwani Kumar

Counsel for the Respondents: Additional Advocate General (Andhra Pradesh)

Click Here To Read/Download Order

Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (AP) 115