Re: Request from Balakrishna - Land dispute

[Helping Hands Foundation]

Dear Brother Balakrishna ji,

Greetings.

After perusal of your email dated 9.3.2026 and its attachments, our HHF committee submitted its recommendations on the further course of action, with a positive note that you have plenty of chances to WIN. Hence, be happy and proceed with the action plan suggested in the attachment.

May the Almighty bless you with SUCCESS in all your endeavours.

Regards,

Abdul Naseer.

On Tue, Mar 10, 2026 at 1:12 PM Helping Hands Foundation <hhf...@gmail.com> wrote:

Dear Balkrishna ji,

Your above email and the attachments were forwarded to our HHF Expert Team for perusal.

The suggestions on the further course of action will be informed to you soon. 

This is for your kind information, please.

Regards,

Abdul Naseer. 

On Mon, Mar 9, 2026 at 3:02 PM I Krishna <balu...@gmail.com> wrote:

Dear Abdul Sir,

I sincerely apologize for my delayed response. I have been going through a period of significant financial and personal pressure, which made it difficult to focus and move forward. However, I have now motivated myself to take things one step at a time, and I am starting with small but meaningful steps.

Instead of attempting to document everything at once — which was causing further delays — I have prepared a concise overview of my case. Please find the attached document "Case Summary.docx" for your reference.

I have also attached "Site as per FMB.pdf", which clearly shows that the disputed layout, few plots Plot no 26 and Plot No. 27 (partially) fall within Government land under Survey Number 193, which is officially allocated for a Sports Complex.

Help Required:

1) Validity of the Government GO — Layout on Assigned Land:

I recently came to know from a reliable source who is in contact with Municipal authorities that if any layout is proved to have plots laid on Government-assigned land, the layout approval can be cancelled and all related documents declared invalid.

I have attached the relevant WhatsApp chat text for your reference. I also verified this through ChatGPT, which confirmed that such provisions exist under AP law — however, I would greatly value your expert opinion and guidance on this matter before proceeding further.

ఆంధ్రప్రదేశ్ ప్రభుత్వం కీలక నిర్ణయం తీసుకుంది. నకిలీ పత్రాలతో నిషేధిత భూములను రిజిస్ట్రేషన్‌లకు చెక్ పెట్టాలని నిర్ణయం తీసుకుంది. ఇలాంటి రిజిస్ట్రేషన్లను రద్దు చేయడానికి జిల్లా కలెక్టర్ నేతృత్వంలో ఒక ప్రత్యేక కమిటీని ఏర్పాటు చేశారు. ఈ కమిటీలో జాయింట్ కలెక్టర్, ఆర్డీవో కూడా సభ్యులుగా ఉంటారు. రిజిస్ట్రేషన్ల చట్టంలో ఈ మార్పులు చేశారు. రిజిస్ట్రేషన్ చేసే అధికారి కావాలనే తప్పు చేస్తే, వారిపై కఠిన చర్యలు తీసుకుంటారు. ఐజీ అనుమతితో క్రిమినల్ కేసు కూడా పెడతారు. ఈ విషయాన్ని రెవెన్యూశాఖ ప్రత్యేక ప్రధాన కార్యదర్శి సాయిప్రసాద్ తెలిపారు. ఆయన ఈ మేరకు ఉత్తర్వులు జారీ చేశారు.
నకిలీ పత్రాలతో నిషేధిత భూముల రిజిస్ట్రేషన్లు జరిగితే.. ఫిర్యాదు అందిన 15 రోజుల్లోనే రిజిస్ట్రార్‌ విచారణ ప్రారంభిస్తారు. తప్పుడు పత్రాలతో రిజిస్ట్రేషన్ జరిగినట్లు నిర్ధారణ అయితే, రిజిస్ట్రార్‌ విచారణ ప్రారంభించి, దస్తావేజులో పేర్కొన్న పార్టీలకు నోటీసులు పంపుతారు. దస్తావేజు నిబంధనలకు విరుద్ధంగా రిజిస్టర్ అయిందని తేలితే, దానిని రాతపూర్వకంగా నమోదు చేసి, రద్దు ప్రక్రియను కొనసాగిస్తారు. ఆ తర్వాత ఈ సంబంధిత పార్టీలకు నోటీసులు జారీ చేసి, జిల్లా స్థాయి కమిటీకి నివేదిక పంపడం ద్వారా రద్దు ప్రక్రియను కొనసాగిస్తారు. నిషేధిత భూములను (22ఏ, 22బి, 22సి జాబితాలో ఉన్నవి) ఎవరైనా నకిలీ పత్రాలతో రిజిస్ట్రేషన్ చేయించుకున్నారని ఫిర్యాదు చేస్తే, రిజిస్ట్రార్‌ స్వయంగా (సుమోటోగా) ఆ దస్తావేజుల రద్దుకు చర్యలు తీసుకోవచ్చు. విచారణలో ఆధారాలు ఉన్నాయని తేలితే, రిజిస్ట్రార్‌ దస్తావేజు రద్దు చర్యలు ప్రారంభిస్తారు. ఒకవేళ ఆధారాలు లేవని తేలితే, ఫిర్యాదును తిరస్కరించి, అందుకు గల కారణాలను ఫారం-3లో నిర్వహించే రిజిస్టర్‌లో నమోదు చేయాలి.

రిజిస్ట్రేషన్ ప్రక్రియలో ఏదైనా తప్పు జరిగితే, దానిని సరిదిద్దడానికి ఒక స్పష్టమైన విధానం అమలులోకి వచ్చింది. రిజిస్ట్రార్ కార్యాలయం నుంచి వచ్చిన విచారణ నివేదికను జిల్లా కలెక్టర్ సారథ్యంలోని కమిటీ 15 రోజుల్లోగా పరిశీలిస్తుంది. ఈ కమిటీలో రిజిస్ట్రార్ ప్రతిపాదనలతో పాటు, సంబంధిత వ్యక్తులు ఇచ్చిన సమాధానాలు, సాక్ష్యాలను కూడా పరిగణనలోకి తీసుకుంటారు. కమిటీ తమ నిర్ణయాన్ని రిజిస్ట్రార్‌కు పంపిస్తుంది. రిజిస్ట్రార్‌కు కమిటీ నిర్ణయం అందిన తర్వాత, ఆయన 7 రోజుల్లోగా తుది ఉత్తర్వులు జారీ చేయాలి. ఈ ఉత్తర్వులలో దస్తావేజు (డాక్యుమెంట్) రద్దు చేయాలా లేక తిరస్కరించాలా అనే విషయం స్పష్టంగా ఉంటుంది. ఈ నిర్ణయాన్ని సంబంధిత అన్ని పక్షాలకు తెలియజేస్తారు.

ఒకవేళ రిజిస్ట్రేషన్ నిబంధనలకు విరుద్ధంగా జరిగినట్లు తేలితే, ఇన్‌స్పెక్టర్ జనరల్ (ఐజీ) నేరుగా జోక్యం చేసుకోవచ్చు. ఐజీ సంబంధిత పార్టీలకు నోటీసులు పంపి, వారి నుంచి వివరణ కోరతారు. ఆ తర్వాత, దస్తావేజును రద్దు చేయాలా లేక ఫిర్యాదును కొట్టివేయాలా అనే దానిపై నిర్ణయం తీసుకుంటారు. రిజిస్ట్రేషన్ రద్దు చేయాలని నిర్ణయిస్తే, ఆ ఉత్తర్వులను సబ్ రిజిస్ట్రార్‌కు పంపిస్తారు. ఈ సమాచారాన్ని రెవెన్యూ, పురపాలక, పంచాయతీ అధికారులకు కూడా తెలియజేస్తారు. అప్పుడు వారు తమ రికార్డులలో (అడంగల్/మ్యుటేషన్) అవసరమైన మార్పులు చేస్తారు. ఈ ప్రక్రియ ద్వారా రిజిస్ట్రేషన్లలో పారదర్శకత పెరుగుతుంది.

రిజిస్ట్రార్ ఉత్తర్వులపై 30 రోజుల్లో ఐజీకి అప్పీలు చేసుకోవచ్చు. ఐజీ ఆరు నెలల్లోగా పరిష్కరించి ఉత్తర్వులు జారీ చేయాలి. ఐజీ నిర్ణయంపై అసంతృప్తి ఉంటే, రెవెన్యూ (రిజిస్ట్రేషన్‌)శాఖ ముఖ్య కార్యదర్శి నేతృత్వంలోని కమిటీకి అప్పీలు చేసుకోవచ్చు. ఈ కమిటీ కూడా ఆరు నెలల్లోగా నిర్ణయం తీసుకోవాలి. కమిటీ నిర్ణయం తర్వాత మూడు వారాల్లో ప్రభుత్వం తుది ఉత్తర్వులు జారీ చేస్తుంది. నకిలీ పత్రాల విషయంలో, అవి నకిలీవని తేలితే వాటి ఆధారంగా ఎలాంటి రిజిస్ట్రేషన్లు చేయకూడదు. అలాంటి పత్రాలను బుక్‌నంబర్‌-2లో తప్పనిసరిగా నమోదు చేయాలి. కోర్టులు లేదా ట్రైబ్యునళ్లు ఏదైనా ఆస్తిని తాత్కాలికంగా లేదా శాశ్వతంగా జప్తు చేస్తే, ఆ ఆస్తికి సంబంధించిన రిజిస్ట్రేషన్లు కూడా చేయరాదు. గతంలో రిజిస్టర్ అయిన అమ్మకపు దస్తావేజును రద్దు చేయాలంటే, కొనుగోలుదారు, అమ్మకందారు ఇద్దరూ తప్పనిసరిగా సంతకాలు చేయాలి. వారిద్దరి మధ్య పరస్పర అంగీకారం ఉందని తెలిపే డిక్లరేషన్ పత్రం ఉండాలి. లేదా, కేంద్ర, రాష్ట్ర ప్రభుత్వాలు లేదా సివిల్ కోర్టు, హైకోర్టు జారీ చేసిన అధికారిక ఉత్తర్వులు ఉంటేనే రద్దు ప్రక్రియ చేపట్టవచ్చు. ఈ నిబంధనలు రిజిస్ట్రేషన్ ప్రక్రియలో పారదర్శకతను పెంచుతాయి.

2) If the above GO is indeed valid and applicable to my case, I kindly request your advice on how to proceed further — including the appropriate authorities to approach and the steps to follow.

I look forward to your valued guidance.

Warm regards,

Balakrishna

On Fri, Jan 9, 2026 at 2:32 PM Helping Hands Foundation <hhf...@gmail.com> wrote:

Subject: Re: Request from Balakrishna - Land Dispute

Date: 09.01.2026

 

Dear Balakrishna ji,

Thank you for your email dated 05.01.2026, and for providing the details of your land dispute in DAMINEDU village. We truly appreciate you reaching out to Helping Hands Foundation as an associate and sharing the attachments as discussed.

 

As you know, I have personally visited your home and inspected the land boundaries and encroachments you described, which has given me a clearer understanding of the situation.

Our team is reviewing these materials in depth to assess how we can best support you within our foundation's guidelines.

Though you have informed me during our personal discussion about all the facts in detail, you still need to submit the required documents as mentioned in this email for physical verification by our team and to guide you accordingly.

 

To proceed further and offer more targeted advice—such as steps for petitioning the Sub-Registrar's Office (SRO), Revenue Department, or District Collector regarding the registration cancellations—we kindly request the following additional information at your convenience:

1. A detailed timeline of key events, including the date you purchased your plot, when the encroachment was first noticed, any prior attempts to resolve it (e.g., discussions with adjacent plot owners or officials), and specifics on the challenges faced in constructing your compound wall over the past 4 years.
2. Copies of any formal complaints, petitions, or representations you have submitted to government bodies (e.g., Tahsildar, Revenue Divisional Officer, or SRO), along with any acknowledgements or responses received.
3. Exact details of your own plot, including the survey number(s), original extent (in acres/square feet), and copies of your sale deed, patta (title document), or encumbrance certificate.
4. Information on the other parties involved, such as the current owners or claimants of adjacent plots (e.g., P. Gangadaram for plot 26, En. Ravi Prasad for plot 31, or others in the Sambavi layout).
5. Recent photographs or site images showing the current boundaries, encroachment areas, and any physical markers (e.g., fences, structures, or the proposed sports complex site).
6. Any updates or copies of recent government notices, GO copies, updated FMB sketches, or communications related to the sports complex allocation or potential registration cancellations.
7. Clarification on the specific assistance you are seeking from HHF (e.g., help in drafting petitions, mediation support, or referrals to legal aid services).

Providing these details will allow us to verify against official records (e.g., via Andhra Pradesh's land portals) and develop a practical plan. We aim to get back to you with recommendations within 7-10 days once we receive this information.

 

Best regards,

Abdul Naseer 

On Mon, Jan 5, 2026 at 8:54 PM I Krishna <balu...@gmail.com> wrote:

Hi Abdul sir,

As discussed, PFA document with more details.

Representations and detail - Helping Hands - Balakrishna.pdf

Disipute site FMB : Site as per-FMB.pdf

Register documents - 26 and 31 register docs.zip

Regards,

Bala

[I Krishna]

Dear Abdul sir,

First, I would like to express my sincere thanks to you and our expert team for spending your valuable time to review my case. As requested, I have attached the email as a PDF.

Due to the large file size, I was unable to send the attachments directly through this email, so I have uploaded the documents to Google Drive for your reference. Could you please download them from there?

Please let me know if any additional information is required from my end.

Regards,

Bala

On Sun, Mar 15, 2026 at 7:52 AM I Krishna <balu...@gmail.com> wrote:

Dear Abdul sir,

First I want to say thanks to you and our experts team for spending their valuable time to verify my case. as requested attaching email pdf and respective supporting documents as zip file. 

Please let me know if any additional information is required from my side.

Regards,

Bala

[Helping Hands Foundation]

Dear Balakrishna ji,

Greetings from the HHF AO Team.

Your two emails and the attachments were well received and forwarded to our Revenue & Legal Expert Teams for review. 

This is for your information, please.

Regards,

HHF.

[Helping Hands Foundation]

Dear Balakrishna ji,

Greetings.

Please find the attachment and act accordingly. 

Regards,

HHF.

[I Krishna]

Dear Abdul sir,

Thanks for your email. Sorry for wrong dates and incorrect communication, please find the inputs on this.

 A. Clarification on the Date of the Court Commissioner Survey  

27.02.2026 -- Commissioner appointed and got information from Lawyer also on the same day.

13.03.2026 -- Commissioner and surveyor came on the same day and the survey was completed on the same day.
As per my knowledge, the survey report has not been submitted to commissioner yet.

 B. Pre-Survey Formalities — Clarifications Required  

We got all B.1 to B.3 steps as per procedure.

C. Observations During the Survey — Clarifications Required

Starting Point of Measurement  -- first he started from my gate without going anywhere.   

Government Land Boundary as Starting Point -- not accepting and listening to me or my lawyer, about this point.   

Instruments Used  -- rover which is GPS based instrument

Presence and Conduct of Defendant   -- yes he and his wife is there

Measurement Discrepancy — Specific Figures -- actually 7 feet 3 inches is the discrepancy, as shown site map attached (G and G(s) point)

 D. Post-Survey Formalities — Clarifications Required

  Receipt of Measurement Sketch / Rough Plan -- not received  

  Commissioner's Report — Submission Status  -- Not yet submitted

  Next Hearing Date -- I will update EOD   

E. Other Clarifications  

Date of Your Response Email to HHF --   14.03.2026

Proof of Earlier Administrative Complaints -- Not available missed unfortunately.

Title of the Original Court Plaint  -- Filled on my name Inakollu Balakrishna, executed by my father inakollu Venkata Krishna Reddy (with power of attorney)

Next action points: getting a letter from Lawyer saying -- we are objecting to a survey saying the survey is going in the wrong direction and next hearing dates.

I have taken coordinates using Mobile (iphone and Android) . It clearly shows the point G in FMB to Point D length is not matching with surveyor points.

Regards,

Bala

[I Krishna]

Dear Abdul sir,

Yesterday I went to the lawyer’s office and spoke with him about getting a letter explaining how the surveyor is objecting to our request to carry out on-ground measurements and how he started the work in the wrong direction.He said he is happy to give this letter after the survey report is submitted to the commissioner with full details of why the surveyor is raising objections (if report comes on our favour then his letter should not conflict to that, that's why he want to give after seeing report)

Regarding the court dates, the commissioner is supposed to submit the report today, 17‑03‑2026, but it is likely to be postponed to the next hearing date, which we will know by today.

The lawyer is also asking us to continue and file an RTI application as early as possible about the relevant Government Orders (G.O.s), before submitting our formal objections, and to clearly record the direction we are taking, as this will be a strong point for our court case.

Please help me to apply for RTI and plan our actions. Lawyer is also appreciated about the direction we are going and actions we are going to take, he is happy to help me in this direction and support us to work together. and whenever I receive the report from the commissioner and the letter from the lawyer, I will share them here.

Thanks once again for giving a hope for this case.

Thanks 

Bala

[Helping Hands Foundation]

Dear Balakrishna ji,

Your proactive approach of using Android and iPhones for the self-survey on your issue is well appreciated.

Please go through the attachments of this email and act accordingly.

Regards,

HHF Team.

[Helping Hands Foundation]

Dear Expert Team,

Please look into the below forwarded email request of Mr Balakrishna and respond accordingly.

Regards,

Abdul Naseer.

---------- Forwarded message ---------
From: I Krishna <balu...@gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 27 Mar, 2026, 21:47
Subject: Re: Request from Balakrishna - Land dispute
To: Helping Hands Foundation <hhf...@gmail.com>

Dear Abdul sir,

I hope you are doing well. 

I have already sent an email to the Auditor and met him in person as well. He has requested more time to analyse the matter in detail before replying to my email. Since this is taking longer than expected, would it be a good idea to apply for RTI while waiting for his reply? Also, applying for RTI would not cause any harm, correct?

Regards,

Bala

On Sat, Mar 21, 2026 at 6:19 AM Helping Hands Foundation <hhf...@gmail.com> wrote:

SUBJECT: Acknowledgement — Two Points Still Awaited 

Dear Balakrishna ji,

Thank you for your response dated 20.03.2026.

Clarification 1 — Father's Address: Confirmed and recorded. This point is now closed.

Clarification 2(a) — Days in India (182+): Noted and analysed. This does not create a problem for your property position. Please share this with your CA when you consult him.

---

The following two points need specific clarification. 

Clarification 2(b): Please consult your Chartered Accountant and obtain his written confirmation — on his letterhead/by email — that your property ownership, the gift settlement deed dated 12.01.2018, and future transactions on your Tirupati plots are fully FEMA-compliant, in light of your current residential pattern of more than 182 days per year in India. Forward his email/letter confirmation to HHF.

Clarification 3: Please raise the specific question with your advocate regarding the discrepancy between "Specific Power of Attorney" on the stamp paper header and "General Power of Attorney" in the opening line of the document body, and report his response to HHF by email.

HHF is prepared to proceed the moment these two confirmations are received.

Regards,
HHF Expert Team

On Fri, Mar 20, 2026 at 4:43 PM I Krishna <balu...@gmail.com> wrote:

Dear Abdul Sir,

Thank you so much for you and our expert team to spend so much time on my issues

Clarification 1 — Your Father's Correct Current Address

Current address : 1-50/2/1, Srinivasapuram, Thiruchanoor Road, Tirupati – 517503. Ph no 9703078035

Clarification 2 — Your Current Residential Pattern in India

(a) Approximately how many days per year are you currently spending in India — is it more than 182 days per year, or less?  -- More than 182 days

(b) Has your Chartered Accountant or tax advisor confirmed that your property ownership, the gift settlement deed, and any future transactions on your Tirupati plots are fully compliant with FEMA regulations given your current Resident tax filing status? -- I have to check and confirm

And last point I will raise with my lawyer and let you know inputs as soon as possible.

Thanks in advance,

Regards,

Bala

On Fri, Mar 20, 2026 at 11:04 AM Helping Hands Foundation <hhf...@gmail.com> wrote:

SUBJECT: Three Final Clarifications Before HHF Proceeds to Action 

Dear Balakrishna ji,

The HHF Expert Committee has reviewed your latest email and the Special Power of Attorney document you have submitted, and wishes to begin this communication on a genuinely positive note.

You have answered every question with honesty, diligence, and remarkable patience — and the results speak for themselves. The Expert Committee is pleased to confirm that the SPA document you have shared has resolved several of the pending concerns in a single stroke. Your OCI Card Number (A3001504) and your UK address are explicitly recorded in the SPA that was prepared by your advocate and submitted to the court — which means the court already has your OCI status on official record. The powers granted to your father under Clauses 2, 5, and 6 of the SPA are broad enough to cover the filing of RTI applications and administrative complaints before government departments on your behalf. And your clarification on RNOR tax status demonstrates that your tax affairs have been managed with proper professional guidance.

Balakrishna ji, you are now very close to the point where HHF can move into full action mode. The RTI applications are ready and waiting. The advisory is finalised. All that stands between where we are today and the dispatch of those documents are three small but important clarifications — which the Expert Committee is confident you can resolve quickly and easily.

Please address each of the following three points:

---

Clarification 1 — Your Father's Correct Current Address

The SPA document submitted to the court in 2021 records your father's address as: D.No. 1-37/1, Srinivasapuram, Padmavathipuram Panchayat, Tiruchanur Road, Tirupati Rural Mandal, Chittoor District.

However, in your email to HHF providing your father's details, you mentioned his address as: 1-50/2/1, Srinivasapuram, Thiruchanoor Road, Tirupati – 517503.

These are two different door numbers at the same locality. Please confirm which of the two is your father's current, correct address for official correspondence as of today.

Why this matters: The RTI applications will be drafted with your father's name and address as the applicant. The address on the application must exactly match his current, verifiable address — because the RTI response will be dispatched by the government authority to that address by post. An incorrect or outdated address means the response may never reach him, and a 30-day RTI window could be lost. This is a simple one-line answer from you — but it is the one detail that determines whether the RTI responses actually land in your father's hands.

---

Clarification 2 — Your Current Residential Pattern in India

You have clarified that after two years of RNOR status, you have been filing your Indian Income Tax Returns as a Resident for the last two years. The Expert Committee respects and acknowledges the professional care with which you have managed your tax status through the RNOR transition.

However, under the Foreign Exchange Management Act, 1999 (FEMA), a person who spends 182 or more days per year in India is treated as a Person Resident in India — regardless of citizenship or OCI status. If your Resident tax filing is based on spending 182 or more days in India per year, your FEMA status may also be that of a Person Resident in India — which carries different property-related rights and obligations compared to a Person Resident Outside India.

Please clarify the following:

(a) Approximately how many days per year are you currently spending in India — is it more than 182 days per year, or less?

(b) Has your Chartered Accountant or tax advisor confirmed that your property ownership, the gift settlement deed, and any future transactions on your Tirupati plots are fully compliant with FEMA regulations given your current Resident tax filing status?

Why this matters: The Expert Committee is not suggesting that there is a problem — in all likelihood, your CA has already addressed this. But before HHF files petitions and complaints in which your property ownership is asserted as the central legal position, we need to be confident that your FEMA standing is confirmed by a professional who is aware of all the facts. One brief confirmation from your CA is all that is needed, and it will close this point permanently.

---

Clarification 3 — The Title Discrepancy in the SPA Document

On carefully reading the SPA, the Expert Committee noticed that the printed header on the stamp paper reads "SPECIFIC POWER OF ATTORNEY" — but the opening line of the document's body reads: "This Deed of General Power of Attorney is executed on this 4th day of March, 2021."

The title and the body of the same document use two different terms — one says Specific, the other says General. In law, these are distinct categories with different scopes of authority.

Please ask your advocate the following specific question and report his answer to HHF:

"The SPA document has 'Specific Power of Attorney' on the stamp paper header but 'General Power of Attorney' in the first line of the text. Is this a concern? If the opposing counsel challenges the document's legal character on this ground, how do you propose to address it? Is there a need to execute a fresh, corrected Power of Attorney to avoid this vulnerability?"

Why this matters: Your advocate prepared this document and is in the best position to assess whether this discrepancy is a practical risk. He may tell you it is a minor drafting error of no legal consequence — in which case HHF will be satisfied. Or he may recommend a corrective step. Either way, it is far better to know his position on this now, rather than having the opposing counsel raise it at a critical moment in the proceedings when there is no time to react.

---

In Summary — What HHF Needs from You:

Point	What is Needed	How Quickly
1	Father's correct current door number and address	As soon as possible — one line answer
2	Approximate days in India per year + CA's FEMA confirmation	Within a few days — brief CA consultation
3	Advocate's view on the Specific vs. General PoA title discrepancy	Within a few days — one direct question to advocate

---

Balakrishna ji, look at how far you have come in this journey. When you first approached HHF, you had a land dispute with no clear roadmap, a biased court survey, missing government orders, and unanswered legal questions about your own status. Today, you have a clear legal strategy backed by two powerful Government Orders, a favourable AP High Court precedent, independent GPS evidence, a valid SPA with broad authority, and a committed expert team working methodically on your behalf.

These three clarifications are not obstacles — they are the final checks before HHF moves into full action. Think of them as the last few steps of preparation before a well-planned journey begins. Answer them at the earliest, and the Expert Committee will proceed without a moment's delay to finalise the RTI applications and the comprehensive advisory for dispatch.

You have every reason to approach this with confidence. Your cause is just, your documents are sound, and you are not alone.

Regards,
HHF Expert Team

On Fri, Mar 20, 2026 at 1:43 PM I Krishna <balu...@gmail.com> wrote:

Dear Abdul sir,

Finally got a copy of the SPA, which clearly mentions my OCI card number and UK address — this document was submitted to the Court and was prepared by the Lawyer. PFA document for your reference.

Regarding tax filing: for the initial 2 years I am eligible to file as RNOR (Resident but Not Ordinarily Resident), which is a transitional tax status for returning NRIs. It exempts foreign-earned income from Indian taxation for 2–3 years. One qualifies to file as RNOR if they are a resident but were non-resident for 9 of the last 10 years. For the last 2 years, I have been filing as a Resident after RNOR eligibility.

Regards,

Bala

On Thu, Mar 19, 2026 at 6:05 AM Helping Hands Foundation <hhf...@gmail.com> wrote:

SUBJECT: Pending Clarifications Required Before HHF Expert Committee Can Proceed Further — Your Land Dispute, Plot No. 1, Survey No. 357/3P, Tiruchanur Village, Tirupati

---

Dear Balakrishna ji,

The HHF Expert Committee acknowledges receipt of your detailed response to our clarification note, and sincerely appreciates the openness and thoroughness with which you have addressed most of the points raised. Your responses have been carefully reviewed and analysed by the Expert Committee.

We are pleased to inform you that the most fundamental concern — regarding the validity of the Gift Settlement Deed dated 12.01.2018 — has been substantially resolved by your clarification that you obtained British nationality only on 01.08.2018, i.e., after the gift deed was executed. Since you were an Indian citizen at the time of that transaction, the deed is legally valid and no FEMA compliance issue arises on that particular transaction. This is a significant relief and strengthens the foundation of your case considerably.

However, before the Expert Committee can proceed to finalise and dispatch any document, application, petition, or advisory on your behalf, certain clarifications remain pending and must be addressed completely and satisfactorily. 

We wish to be transparent: the Expert Committee will not proceed to the next step — including the RTI applications — until all the points below have been fully clarified and the Committee is satisfied on every aspect. This is not a procedural formality. Each of these points carries a direct legal consequence for your case, and proceeding without clarity on any one of them could cause serious and avoidable damage.

We also wish to assure you, Balakrishna ji, that all your communications with HHF — including your personal details, nationality, and the contents of your emails — are being treated with complete confidentiality. Your emails and the information you have shared are not being circulated to the HHF WhatsApp/email groups or to any other HHF members. 

They are being reviewed exclusively by the Expert Committee on a strictly need-to-know basis. You may communicate with us freely and without any concern on this account.

---

The following clarifications are still pending and must be addressed point by point:

---

Pending Point 1 — D.3: Scope of the Special Power of Attorney (SPA)

In your earlier response, you confirmed that your father, Shri I.V. Krishna Reddy, holds a Special Power of Attorney (SPA) executed by you for the purpose of the court proceedings. You also confirmed that you are happy for your father to file the RTI applications as the applicant.

However, on the question of whether the SPA covers filings before government authorities — such as RTI applications, administrative complaints to the Tahsildar, RDO, Sub-Registrar, and District Collector — you responded: "Need to confirm."

This confirmation is essential and is still awaited. Please provide the following specific answers:

(a) Please read the SPA document carefully, or have your advocate read it, and confirm whether the SPA contains any clause authorising your father to file applications, representations, or complaints before government departments and authorities on your behalf — in addition to representing you in court.

(b) If the SPA is restricted only to court proceedings, please inform us. In that case, HHF will advise on whether a fresh, broader authorisation needs to be executed by you before your father can file RTI applications and administrative complaints on your behalf.

(c) Please also confirm whether the SPA is a registered document — i.e., whether it was executed before and registered with the Sub-Registrar's Office. A registered SPA carries greater legal weight before government authorities than an unregistered one.

Why this matters: If your father files RTI applications or administrative complaints relying on an SPA that does not cover those activities, the concerned authority is within its right to reject the application or complaint on the ground that the applicant lacks authority to file on behalf of the property owner. This would waste time and create adverse entries. Before HHF redrafts the RTI applications in your father's name, the scope of the SPA must be confirmed beyond doubt.

---

Pending Point 2 — C.1 and C.2: Your Advocate's Awareness — Explicit Confirmation Required

In your response, you stated that your advocate is aware of your non-Indian nationality — but you qualified this with the words "as per my knowledge." You also confirmed that the advocate has confirmed the validity of your title and standing — but again, the context of this confirmation is unclear.

The Expert Committee requires greater precision on this, because the advocate's awareness and confirmation are the cornerstones of the court proceedings going forward. Please clarify:

(a) Have you had a specific, direct, and explicit conversation with your advocate in which you told him clearly — in so many words — that you are a British citizen holding an OCI card? Or is your belief that he is aware based on the fact that your UK address appears in the plaint and you have assumed he drew his own conclusion from that?

(b) If you have had such an explicit conversation, when did it take place — was it before the court plaint was filed in 2021, or at some later point?

(c) Has your advocate specifically and explicitly confirmed to you — after being told that you are a British OCI cardholder and not an Indian citizen — that your standing as plaintiff in OS 624/2021 and OS 982/2021 is fully valid, and that the gift settlement deed dated 12.01.2018 gives you a valid, unimpeachable title to Plot No. 1? Or was his general confirmation of your title given without this specific context being discussed?

Why this matters: There is a significant legal difference between an NRI who remains an Indian citizen and a foreign national holding an OCI card, particularly in terms of representation before courts and authorities. If your advocate is operating under the assumption that you are an Indian NRI — rather than a British OCI holder — his assessment of your standing may be based on an incomplete factual picture. If the opposing counsel raises your foreign nationality as a challenge to your locus standi mid-proceedings, your advocate must already be prepared with a considered legal position on this. The Expert Committee cannot assume this preparation is in place unless it is explicitly confirmed.

What we need from you: Please have a direct, explicit conversation with your advocate on this specific point before responding to us, and report to HHF precisely what he says. If possible, obtain a written note or message from him confirming his awareness and his professional opinion — even an informal WhatsApp message from him will suffice for HHF's records at this stage.

---

Pending Point 3 — E.1: Exact Representation of Nationality in the Court Plaint

You have stated that your UK address is mentioned in the court plaint. However, the question the Expert Committee raised was more specific than the address — it was about how your nationality was represented. The address and the nationality are two separate matters.

Please clarify:

(a) Does the court plaint describe you as a British citizen, or as an Indian national / person of Indian origin, or is no nationality mentioned at all — with only the UK address appearing?

(b) Does the plaint describe your father, Shri I.V. Krishna Reddy, as acting on your behalf through a Special Power of Attorney? And if so, does it mention that he is authorised to act on behalf of a British national?

(c) Is your Aadhaar number mentioned anywhere in the plaint or in the documents submitted to the court? If yes, please note that Aadhaar is a proof of identity and residence, not of citizenship — and if it has been cited as proof of Indian citizenship anywhere, that needs to be corrected.

Why this matters: Indian civil courts exercise jurisdiction over foreign nationals, and an OCI cardholder can be a plaintiff in Indian courts. However, the procedural requirements and the nature of the representation in the plaint must be accurate. If the plaint has described you in a manner that is inconsistent with your actual nationality — for example, omitting your British nationality in a context where it should have been disclosed — the opposing advocate can use this as a ground to challenge the integrity of the plaint. Your advocate must be specifically asked about this and must confirm that the plaint's representation of your identity is accurate and complete.

---

Pending Point 4 — E.2: Income Tax Filing Status — The Contradiction Must Be Resolved

Your response stated: "Yes I am filing as Resident — NRI from last 3 years."

The Expert Committee must draw your attention to an important point: under the Indian Income Tax Act, 1961, the terms "Resident" and "NRI (Non-Resident Indian)" are mutually exclusive residential status categories. A person is assessed as either a Resident or as a Non-Resident in any given financial year — they cannot be both simultaneously. These are defined by the number of days spent in India during the financial year and the preceding years, and are entirely independent of citizenship.

The Expert Committee is therefore not certain what you mean by "Resident — NRI." There are two possibilities:

(a) You may mean that you have been filing your Indian income tax returns as a Non-Resident (i.e., NRI status) for the last three years — which would be the correct status for an OCI cardholder primarily residing in the UK. If this is what you mean, please confirm it clearly.

(b) Alternatively, you may have been filing as a Resident for Indian income tax purposes, despite living primarily in the UK — which would be incorrect for someone spending the majority of the year outside India, and could itself be a compliance issue.

Please clarify precisely:

(i) What residential status — Resident, Non-Resident Ordinary (NRO), or Not Ordinarily Resident (NOR) — has been shown on your Indian Income Tax Returns for the last three financial years?

(ii) Do you file your income tax returns in India through a Chartered Accountant or tax consultant? If yes, please ask your CA to confirm your correct residential status under the Income Tax Act.

(iii) Were the property transactions — the original sale deed (2016) and the gift settlement deed (2018) — conducted through proper NRI banking channels (NRE/NRO accounts), or through a regular Indian savings account? This is relevant to FEMA compliance for any future transactions on the property.

Why this matters: Income tax residential status affects how property income, capital gains, and property transactions are taxed and reported. If you have been filing as "Resident" when your correct status is "Non-Resident," your past returns may need to be reviewed. More immediately, it also affects the representation of your financial status in court proceedings — particularly if the opposing party ever raises a question about the financial transactions underlying the property purchase. The Expert Committee is raising this now so that it can be addressed proactively with your CA, rather than being discovered mid-litigation.

---

Summary of All Pending Clarifications:

Ref.	Pending Point	What is Specifically Needed
D.3	SPA Scope	Does SPA cover government authority filings? Is it registered?
C.1	Advocate's Awareness	Explicit confirmation that advocate knows of British OCI status — not assumed
C.2	Advocate's Confirmation	Confirmation given specifically in context of British OCI status, not generically
E.1	Court Plaint Nationality	Exact wording — British national mentioned, or only UK address? Aadhaar used?
E.2	Income Tax Status	Correct category: Resident or Non-Resident? Property transactions through NRE/NRO?

---

Our Commitment to You:

Balakrishna ji, the Expert Committee wishes to make one thing very clear: the questions above are not obstacles or doubts about your credibility. They are the final layer of due diligence that any responsible legal team would undertake before committing to a course of action in an active court matter involving a foreign national's property rights.

Your case is strong. The evidence is solid. The legal instruments — G.O. No. 490, G.O. Ms. No. 2 dated 02.01.2026, the AP High Court precedent, the GPS coordinate evidence — are all in your favour. All of that remains intact. The Expert Committee simply needs to be satisfied that the procedural and compliance foundation is equally solid before it places its institutional guidance behind your case.

Please respond to each of the above four pending points as completely and precisely as possible. Once the Expert Committee is satisfied on all aspects, the revised RTI applications and the comprehensive advisory will be finalised and dispatched without any further delay.

We look forward to your response.

(On behalf of the HHF Expert Committee)

HHF AO Committee 

Date: 19.03.2026

On Wed, Mar 18, 2026 at 9:05 PM I Krishna <balu...@gmail.com> wrote:

Dear Abdul sir,

Please find the below inputs for the point requested.

Ref.	Section	Clarification Sought	Inputs from Balakrishna
A.1	Nationality	Current nationality — which country's passport?	British Citizen (UK)
A.2	OCI Status	Does Balakrishna hold an OCI card?	Yes
A.3	Immigration Status	Current India residency basis — OCI / visa / PIO?	OCI
A.4	Status in 2018	Was he a non-Indian national at time of gift deed — 12.01.2018?	Got nationality on 01.08.2018, after a gift deed.
B.1	FEMA Compliance	Was FEMA / RBI compliance undertaken at time of gift deed?	I don’t know this  when we are doing gift deed.
B.2	Family Gift	Was gift deed executed as family transaction (brother to brother)?	Yes my own brother given to me
C.1	Advocate's Awareness	Is the advocate aware of non-Indian nationality?	As per my knowledge yes
C.2	Advocate's Confirmation	Has advocate confirmed title and standing are valid?	Yes
D.1	Father as RTI Applicant	Does Balakrishna consent to father filing RTI in his name?	Yes I am happy to ask my Father to apply
D.2	Father's Details	Father's full name, address, and mobile number?	I V Krishna Reddy, 1-50/2/1, Srinivasapuram, Thirchanoor Road, Tirupati -517503 +91 9703078035
D.3	SPA Scope	Does SPA cover government authority applications, or only court?	Need to confirm
D.4	Father's Availability	Is father in India and available to sign and follow up on RTIs?	Yes, he is in India and available to sign and follow up on RTIs
E.1	Court Plaint	How was Balakrishna's nationality represented in court plaint?	UK address also mentioned
E.2	Income Tax Status	Is Balakrishna assessed as Resident / NRI / foreign national?	Yes I am filing as Resident - NRI from last 3 years

Regards,

Bala

On Wed, Mar 18, 2026 at 10:30 AM Helping Hands Foundation <hhf...@gmail.com> wrote:

Dear Sir,

Please respond to the queries mentioned in the attachment.

Regards,

HHF AO Team

On Tue, Mar 17, 2026 at 9:18 PM I Krishna <balu...@gmail.com> wrote:

Dear Abdul sir,

Thanks for the detailed email. I need one clarification regarding the RTI application. In the declaration, I have to oath as an Indian citizen; however, I am not an Indian citizen, though I do have an Aadhaar card.

Question 1: Are only Indian citizens eligible to apply for RTI?

Question 2: In my court case scenario, my father has filed a Special Power of Attorney, attaching the documents submitted during the case filing to the court.

Please help me understand how to proceed with the RTI application in my case.

Thanks & Regards

Bala

[Helping Hands Foundation]

SUBJECT: Response to Your Email dated 04.04.2026 — One Correction Required Before HHF Proceeds

Dear Balakrishna ji,

The HHF Expert Committee acknowledges receipt of your email dated 04.04.2026, along with the CA's confirmation and your advocate's clarification regarding the SPA.

The following is the Committee's assessment:

Clarification 3 — SPA Title Discrepancy: Your advocate's confirmation is accepted. This point is now closed.

Clarification 2(b) — CA's FEMA Compliance Opinion: The Expert Committee has carefully reviewed the CA's email dated 04.04.2026. While the overall conclusions are satisfactory, a factual error has been identified that must be corrected before HHF can formally accept and rely upon this opinion.

The CA's email states — "the property received through a gift settlement deed dated 12.01.2018 from a relative is also permissible under FEMA provisions, and as the gift received from your mother, it is also a permissible transaction."

The gift settlement deed dated 12.01.2018 was executed in your favour by your brother, Shri I. Vamsi Krishna, not your mother. This is clearly established across all documents submitted to HHF, including the gift settlement deed itself.

The CA himself has stated in his closing paragraph that his opinion is based on the facts and documents made available to him, and that any change in facts may require reconsideration. Since the factual basis of his opinion as currently stated is incorrect on this specific point, HHF cannot formally rely upon it in its present form.

Action Required from You: Please bring this factual error to your CA's attention by email and request him to issue a corrected confirmation stating that the gift was received from your brother — and not your mother. The legal conclusion in his opinion will remain unchanged, as a gift from a brother is equally permissible under FEMA. Only the factual reference needs to be corrected.

Please forward the CA's corrected email confirmation to HHF at the earliest.

Important: The Expert Committee will not proceed to the next step until this corrected confirmation is received and found satisfactory in all respects.

Regards,

HHF Expert Committee

On Sat, Apr 4, 2026 at 8:55 PM I Krishna <balu...@gmail.com> wrote:

Dear Abdul sir,

Finally, after chasing my auditor many times, I received the attached reply from him. Due to year-end closing, he was unable to send the email to me earlier.

Regarding Clarification 3: 'Please raise the specific question with your advocate regarding the discrepancy between "Specific Power of Attorney" on the stamp paper header and "General Power of Attorney" in the opening line of the document body, and report his response to HHF by email.'

I spoke to my lawyer and he confirmed that it is a Special Power of Attorney for a few sites, with all general clauses included. He stated that this will not be an issue in the future.

Regards,

Bala

On Fri, Mar 27, 2026 at 4:16 PM I Krishna <balu...@gmail.com> wrote:

Dear Abdul sir,

I hope you are doing well. 

I have already sent an email to the Auditor and met him in person as well. He has requested more time to analyse the matter in detail before replying to my email. Since this is taking longer than expected, would it be a good idea to apply for RTI while waiting for his reply? Also, applying for RTI would not cause any harm, correct?

Regards,

Bala

On Sat, Mar 21, 2026 at 6:19 AM Helping Hands Foundation <hhf...@gmail.com> wrote:

SUBJECT: Acknowledgement — Two Points Still Awaited 

Dear Balakrishna ji,

Thank you for your response dated 20.03.2026.

Clarification 1 — Father's Address: Confirmed and recorded. This point is now closed.

Clarification 2(a) — Days in India (182+): Noted and analysed. This does not create a problem for your property position. Please share this with your CA when you consult him.

---

The following two points need specific clarification. 

Clarification 2(b): Please consult your Chartered Accountant and obtain his written confirmation — on his letterhead/by email — that your property ownership, the gift settlement deed dated 12.01.2018, and future transactions on your Tirupati plots are fully FEMA-compliant, in light of your current residential pattern of more than 182 days per year in India. Forward his email/letter confirmation to HHF.

Clarification 3: Please raise the specific question with your advocate regarding the discrepancy between "Specific Power of Attorney" on the stamp paper header and "General Power of Attorney" in the opening line of the document body, and report his response to HHF by email.

HHF is prepared to proceed the moment these two confirmations are received.

Regards,
HHF Expert Team

On Fri, Mar 20, 2026 at 4:43 PM I Krishna <balu...@gmail.com> wrote:

Dear Abdul Sir,

Thank you so much for you and our expert team to spend so much time on my issues

Clarification 1 — Your Father's Correct Current Address

Current address : 1-50/2/1, Srinivasapuram, Thiruchanoor Road, Tirupati – 517503. Ph no 9703078035

Clarification 2 — Your Current Residential Pattern in India

(a) Approximately how many days per year are you currently spending in India — is it more than 182 days per year, or less?  -- More than 182 days

(b) Has your Chartered Accountant or tax advisor confirmed that your property ownership, the gift settlement deed, and any future transactions on your Tirupati plots are fully compliant with FEMA regulations given your current Resident tax filing status? -- I have to check and confirm

And last point I will raise with my lawyer and let you know inputs as soon as possible.

Thanks in advance,

Regards,

Bala

On Fri, Mar 20, 2026 at 1:43 PM I Krishna <balu...@gmail.com> wrote:

Dear Abdul sir,

On Wed, Mar 18, 2026 at 9:05 PM I Krishna <balu...@gmail.com> wrote:

Dear Abdul sir,

On Tue, Mar 17, 2026 at 9:18 PM I Krishna <balu...@gmail.com> wrote:

Dear Abdul sir,

Thanks for the detailed email. I need one clarification regarding the RTI application. In the declaration, I have to oath as an Indian citizen; however, I am not an Indian citizen, though I do have an Aadhaar card.

Question 1: Are only Indian citizens eligible to apply for RTI?

Question 2: In my court case scenario, my father has filed a Special Power of Attorney, attaching the documents submitted during the case filing to the court.

Please help me understand how to proceed with the RTI application in my case.

Thanks & Regards

Bala

[Helping Hands Foundation]

Dear Expert Team members,

Mr Balakrishna sent the revised version of his CA report, through an email, which is forwarded to you, for perusal and initiation of further course of action.

Regards,

Abdul Naseer.

---------- Forwarded message ---------
From: I Krishna <balu...@gmail.com>
Date: Sun, 5 Apr, 2026, 21:27
Subject: Re: Request from Balakrishna - Land dispute
To: Helping Hands Foundation <hhf...@gmail.com>

Dear Abdul sir,

Please find the attached email from the CA with the correct details. Apologies for not reviewing it carefully earlier — thank you for finding this and sending it to me.

Regards,

Bala

[Helping Hands Foundation]

Mr Balakrishna ji,

Please find the attached pdf and act accordingly.

Regards,

HHF Team

[I Krishna]

Dear Helping hands team,

Thanks for detail email. I will file RTI this Wednesday.

One small clarification please, file administrative complaints - Is there any format for this? If any please share 

Thanks & Regards

Balakrishna 

[Helping Hands Foundation]

SUBJECT: Re: Your Email dated 06.04.2026 — Administrative Complaint Format – Reg.

Dear Balakrishna ji,

Thank you for your email dated 06.04.2026. Your confirmation that you will file the RTI applications on Wednesday, 8.4.26, is noted and appreciated. Please ensure that your father signs all three applications and that a copy of the SPA is enclosed with each, as instructed in the advisory.

Regarding Administrative Complaints — Format:

There is no prescribed statutory format for administrative complaints filed before the RDO, Tahsildar, Sub-Registrar's Office, and District Collector. These are formal representations addressed to the respective authority, setting out the facts of the encroachment, the relevant government orders, and the relief sought. HHF will draft all four complaints for you. Please do not attempt to draft these independently. Once the RTI applications are filed and the receipts are in hand, inform HHF by email, and the Expert Committee will prepare the four complaint drafts for your father to sign and dispatch by Registered Post.

With Best Wishes,

HHF Expert Committee

[I Krishna]

Dear Helping Hands team,

Thank you so much for your valuable time and inputs.

With the help of AI, I have prepared draft documents based on my knowledge, which I would like to submit to a lawyer. Whenever you have time, please review them once.

Once I have posted all the RTI applications, I will update you along with the expert opinions.

Regards,

Bala

[I Krishna]

Dear Helping Hands team, 

Today posted 3 RTI's to respective addresses. PFA speed post receipts just for future reference.

Thanks once again for your expertise.

Regards,

Bala

[Helping Hands Foundation]

SUBJECT: Review of Your Draft Documents dated 07.04.2026 — Corrections and Additions Required before Submission to Advocate | OS No. 624/2021 and OS No. 982/2021

Dear Balakrishna ji,

The HHF Expert Committee has carefully and thoroughly reviewed both documents you prepared and submitted on 07.04.2026 — namely, the Legal Statement of Facts (13.03.2026) and the Court Objection Summary for Advocate. The Committee also acknowledges your email dated 08.04.2026 confirming that all three RTI applications have been dispatched by Speed Post.

On the documents themselves, the Expert Committee wishes to place on record its genuine appreciation for the quality, detail, and legal coherence of both drafts. The core arguments are sound, the structure is appropriate, and the technical analysis — particularly on the GPS Rover precision, the Haversine formula calculations, and the identification of Sambhavi Layout's illegality under G.O. No. 490 — reflects serious and diligent preparation. The point about photographing the GPS Rover screen in real time at every measurement point to create a tamper-proof record is particularly well-conceived and should be specifically requested as a court direction in the fresh survey order.

However, before either document is placed before your advocate, a number of corrections, additions, and clarifications are necessary. The Expert Committee is listing them in detail below. Please address every point without exception before submitting the documents to your advocate. An advocate who receives documents with inconsistent figures, missing tables, incomplete details, or unsubstantiated allegations will find it difficult to convert them into a court petition with confidence.

 

PART I — CORRECTIONS AND ADDITIONS REQUIRED IN DOCUMENT 1 Legal Statement of Facts (13.03.2026)

Item 1.1 — Court Name and Case Number (Critical)

The document currently shows the court name and case number as blank ("______"). These must be filled in before the document is given to your advocate. Please insert:

Court: The name of the court before which OS No. 624/2021 and OS No. 982/2021 are pending — please confirm the exact name from your advocate or from the court documents.

Case Number: Both OS No. 624/2021 and OS No. 982/2021 should be referenced, as the survey was conducted in the context of both cases.

Item 1.2 — Plaintiff's Address Must Match Court Plaint Exactly

The address given for you in the Statement of Facts reads: "9-84/23, Srikirshna Nilayam, Advaitha Nagar, Daminadu, Tirupathi." Please verify: (a) the spelling "Srikirshna Nilayam" — confirm whether this is the correct name and spelling of your residence; (b) whether the address in this document exactly matches the address recorded in the original court plaint. Any discrepancy between the address in this statement and the address in the plaint can be used by the opposing counsel to raise a question about identity. Please confirm the exact address as it appears in the plaint and use that verbatim.

Item 1.3 — Opposite Party's Name Must Be Formal and Complete

The opposite party is currently described as "Giri Prasad garu and family." In a court document, informal references are not appropriate. Please replace this with the full formal name as it appears in the original plaint — which, based on documents previously submitted to HHF, is: Shri G. Giri Prasad Babu, S/o G. Subbaiah, Hindu, aged 48 years, Employee, D.No. 19-4-272, S.T.V. Nagar, Tirupati, Chittoor District. The term "garu" must be removed throughout both documents wherever it appears.

Item 1.4 — Advocate's Work Memo Must Be Specifically Identified

The Statement refers to "my Advocate's Work Memo" without naming the advocate or citing the Work Memo's date or reference number. Please insert your advocate's full name, enrolment number, and the date of the Work Memo wherever this document is referenced. Your advocate will provide you with this information.

Item 1.5 — The Separately Filed Affidavit

The Purpose section states this statement is submitted "in support of the Affidavit filed separately." Please clarify with your advocate whether a separate affidavit has already been filed, or whether this statement itself will be affirmed on oath. If no separate affidavit exists, this reference must either be removed or the advocate must be asked to prepare one. A reference to a non-existent affidavit in a court document creates a serious gap in the record.

---

PART II — CORRECTIONS AND ADDITIONS REQUIRED IN DOCUMENT 2 Court Objection Summary for Advocate

Item 2.1 — Inconsistency in Measurement Figures (Most Important)

This is the most critical correction in both documents and must be resolved before anything else. The following inconsistency has been identified:

Document 1 (Legal Statement of Facts) states the surveyor placed the rover instrument "approximately 8 feet inside the Petitioner's site boundary."

Document 2 (Court Objection Summary) states the discrepancy between Point G and Point G(s) is 7 feet 3 inches.

These are two different figures appearing in two documents prepared by the same person for the same case. An advocate or the opposing counsel reviewing both documents together will immediately notice this inconsistency and will question the reliability of both. Please clarify:

(a) Does the "8 feet inside the boundary" refer to the starting point of the rover placement — i.e., how far inside the boundary the surveyor placed his instrument — while the "7 feet 3 inches" refers to the resulting discrepancy at the end point of the survey (Point G vs. Point G(s))? If so, these are two different measurements referring to two different aspects of the same error, and both documents must clearly explain this distinction so that the figures are not read as contradictory.

(b) Or is one of the figures incorrect? If so, which one is correct, and which document needs to be amended?

Please clarify this specifically to HHF by email, and thereafter ensure that both documents use consistent figures with a clear explanation of what each figure refers to.

Item 2.2 — The Tape Measurement Figures in Objection 1G (New Information — Verification Required)

Objection 1G introduces two new measurement figures that have not previously been reported to HHF — namely, that Plot 1 is already short by 2 feet 9 inches even when measured from the correct reference point (Plot 26 building), and that the shortfall increases to 5 feet 3 inches if the surveyor's incorrect reference point (broken compound wall) is used. These are significant and serious figures that will be challenged by the opposing side.

Please clarify the following by email to HHF:

(a) Who conducted this tape measurement — you personally, your father, a private engineer, or someone else?

(b) On what date was this measurement taken?

(c) Is this measurement documented — i.e., is there a written note, sketch, or photograph recording the tape measurement and the resulting figures?

(d) Can this measurement be independently replicated by your advocate or a court-appointed officer without any technical instrument?

The Expert Committee notes that you have correctly described this as a simple ground-level measurement that any officer can independently replicate — which is its greatest strength. But before it is placed before the court, the measurement must have a documented basis that your advocate can stand behind.

Item 2.3 — Missing Table in Objection 1G

Objection 1G states "The following table summarises the ground measurement position clearly" — but no table appears in the document. This table is essential to explain the 2 feet 9 inch and 5 feet 3 inch figures clearly to the court. Please prepare this table with the actual figures and insert it in the document before submitting to the advocate.

Item 2.4 — Missing GPS Comparison Table in Objection 4A

The heading "A. GPS Measurement Comparison" in Objection 4 is present but the table itself is missing from the document. This table — showing Distance D to G (FMB: 507 feet / 773 links), Distance D to G(s) (Surveyor: 516+ feet), and the resulting discrepancy — is a critical piece of evidence. Please prepare and insert this table.

Item 2.5 — Missing Content in Objection 4D

The heading "D. Valid On-Ground Physical References That Must Be Used" in Objection 4 is present but no content follows it. Please complete this section by listing all the valid on-ground physical reference points that the fresh surveyor should be directed to use — such as the Point D survey stone, the building on Plot 26, the NGO Layout boundaries, and the existing compound wall on the South side of Plot 1.

Item 2.6 — Identity of the NGO Layout (Objection 2)

Objection 2 refers to an "NGO Layout" adjacent to Plot 1 as an independent cross-reference. For the court to accept this as a valid reference point and direct the surveyor to use it, the NGO Layout must be formally identified. Please provide the following to HHF: (a) the full name of the NGO; (b) the registration details of the layout — LP Number or approval reference; (c) the authority (TUDA / Gram Panchayat / Municipality) that approved it; and (d) the survey numbers on which it is situated. Without this information, the court cannot give a specific direction regarding the NGO Layout boundaries.

Item 2.7 — Key Witness — Dhanunjayallu

Objection 1E identifies Dhanunjayallu — the person who originally sold the land to you — as a potential witness who can testify about the actual boundary shown at the time of sale. This is a valuable and potentially decisive witness. Please clarify the following by email: (a) Do you have Dhanunjayallu's current address and contact details? (b) Have you or your father spoken to him about this matter — is he willing to testify before the court? (c) Does your advocate have his details? Please take this up with your advocate and ask him specifically whether a direction should be sought from the court to summon Dhanunjayallu as a witness and to require the Sambhavi Layout developer to appear before the court.

Item 2.8 — Annexures C and D — Haversine Calculations and GPS Screenshots

The Haversine formula calculation sheets and GPS screenshots are referenced as Annexures C and D but are not attached to the document. These are critical technical evidence that form the backbone of Objection 3 and Objection 4. Before the document is given to your advocate: (a) prepare the Haversine calculation sheets clearly, showing the formula used, the input coordinates, and the resulting distance figures; (b) compile the GPS screenshots from both iPhone and Android devices in a single document; and (c) ensure both are attached as Annexures C and D respectively. If you need assistance in structuring the Haversine calculation sheet for court presentation, please inform HHF and the Expert Committee will assist.

Item 2.9 — Allegation of Local Influence (Objection 1E) — Handle With Caution

Objection 1E states that the Respondent's spouse and relatives are employed as Government employees with contacts in the MRO (Mandal Revenue Office), and raises this as a concern about undue local influence on the Surveyor. The Expert Committee wishes to advise you on this point with care.

This is a serious allegation. In a court petition, allegations of undue influence or corruption against a government-appointed officer carry significant weight — but they also carry significant risk if they cannot be substantiated. A court will not act on a general allegation without specific evidence. If this allegation is included in the petition without factual support, the opposing counsel can turn it around and use it to portray you as making baseless accusations, which can damage your credibility on the factual issues where your evidence is genuinely strong.

Please discuss this specific point with your advocate before including it. Ask your advocate: "Do we have sufficient evidence to support this allegation, and is it strategically advisable to include it in the petition at this stage?" If the advocate advises that it should be included, he will know how to frame it appropriately for the court. If not, it is safer to omit it for now and preserve it for a later stage if direct evidence emerges.

Item 2.10 — List of Annexures

The document references Annexures A through E but only some are described. Please prepare a complete, numbered list of all annexures and confirm which ones are currently available and which are still to be prepared. Share this list with HHF so that the Expert Committee can advise on any gaps.

PART III — GENERAL INSTRUCTIONS FOR BOTH DOCUMENTS

Item 3.1 — Consistency Across Both Documents

Once all the above corrections have been made, please read both documents together from beginning to end and verify that every figure, date, name, and fact is consistent between the two. Any figure or fact that appears in both documents must be stated identically in both.

Item 3.2 — Formal Language Throughout

Please review both documents and remove all informal language. Specifically: replace all instances of "garu" with the person's formal name; replace "I" with "the Petitioner" wherever appropriate in the court-format document; and ensure that all dates are in dd.mm.yyyy format consistently throughout.

Item 3.3 — Do Not Submit to Advocate Until Corrections Are Complete

The Expert Committee strongly advises that you do not submit either document to your advocate in their current form. An advocate who receives a document with missing tables, blank case numbers, inconsistent figures, and incomplete annexures will either return it to you for correction — wasting time — or will proceed with the gaps, which could weaken the petition. Please complete all corrections first, then share the revised versions with HHF for a final review. Once HHF is satisfied, you may submit to your advocate with confidence.

Summary of All Pending Actions from You:

Item	Action Required	Priority
1.1	Insert the correct court name and case number	Immediate
1.2	Verify and correct the plaintiff's address to match the plaintiff exactly	Immediate
1.3	Replace informal opposite party reference with full formal name	Immediate
1.4	Insert advocate's name, enrolment number, and Work Memo date	Immediate
1.5	Clarify with the advocate whether a separate affidavit exists or is needed	This week
2.1	Reconcile "8 feet" vs "7 feet 3 inches" — clarify to HHF by email first	Most urgent
2.2	Confirm basis of tape measurement — who, when, documented?	Urgent
2.3	Prepare and insert missing table in Objection 1G	Urgent
2.4	Prepare and insert missing GPS comparison table in Objection 4A	Urgent
2.5	Complete missing content in Objection 4D	Urgent
2.6	Provide full identity details of NGO Layout	Urgent
2.7	Confirm Dhanunjayallu's availability and discuss with advocate	This week
2.8	Prepare and attach Annexures C and D (Haversine + GPS screenshots)	Urgent
2.9	Discuss local influence allegation with advocate before including	This week
2.10	Prepare complete annexure list and share with HHF	Urgent
3.1	Read both documents together for consistency after corrections	After all above
3.2	Remove all informal language — replace "garu," standardise dates	Throughout
3.3	Do not submit to advocate until HHF has reviewed revised versions	Standing instruction

 

Once you have addressed all the above, please send the revised versions of both documents to HHF by email for a final review. The Expert Committee will turn around its review promptly so that there is no delay in your advocate receiving the finalized documents.

 

Regards,

HHF Expert Committee

[I Krishna]

Dear Helping Hands team,

Thank you so much for your valuable inputs, 

Note: Whenever you have time, please help me to prepare complaint letters, which I can submit parallely.

I have incorporated changes Please find my inputs, 
Legal_Statement_of_Facts_13Mar2026 -- this document is recomended by our HHF team, so prepared, I will review with Lawyer to fill few details which I can get fro Lawyer before submitting.

Court_Objection_Summary_for_Advocate --This document lawyer ask me to prepare for his knowledge, afterwards, he said, he will prepare separate document and submit to court.

Item	Action Required	Priority	Comments

1.1

Insert the correct court name and case number

Immediate

Court Name-- Lawyer confirmed he will fill

1.2

Verify and correct the plaintiff's address to match the plaintiff exactly

Immediate

Done

1.3

Replace informal opposite party reference with full formal name

Immediate

Done

1.4

Insert advocate's name, enrolment number, and Work Memo date

Immediate

Done -- We will fill enrollement details when I submit to Advocate

1.5

Clarify with the advocate whether a separate affidavit exists or is needed

This week

This is my self delcaration, so need of mentioning separate afficavit

2.1

Reconcile "8 feet" vs "7 feet 3 inches" — clarify to HHF by email first

Most urgent

Done -- It is 7feet 3 inches

2.2

Confirm basis of tape measurement — who, when, documented?

Urgent

Done

2.3

Prepare and insert missing table in Objection 1G

Urgent

Already there in document .. May be it is not showing, I will send PDF

2.4

Prepare and insert missing GPS comparison table in Objection 4A

Urgent

Already there in document .. May be it is not showing, I will send PDF

2.5

Complete missing content in Objection 4D

Urgent

Already there in document .. May be it is not showing, I will send PDF

2.6

Provide full identity details of NGO Layout

Urgent

Not available, asking court to direct to surveyor to get it

2.7

Confirm Dhanunjayallu's availability and discuss with advocate

This week

In Progress.. My Lawyer also have good contacts to this person and he came to Lawyer also to discuss same

2.8

Prepare and attach Annexures C and D (Haversine + GPS screenshots)

Urgent

Done

2.9

Discuss local influence allegation with advocate before including

This week

Sure I will discuss

2.1

Prepare complete annexure list and share with HHF

Urgent

3.1

Read both documents together for consistency after corrections

After all above

Done

3.2

Remove all informal language — replace "garu," standardise dates

Throughout

Done

3.3

Do not submit to advocate until HHF has reviewed revised versions

Standing instruction

Ok Sir

Regards,

Bala

[I Krishna]

Dear Helping hands team,

I hope everything is fine from your side.

Today both RTI posts has come back to me with message saying "insufficient address"

Can you please help me to get correct address?

Thanks 

Bala

[Helping Hands Foundation]

SUBJECT: Action Required — Re-dispatch of Two Returned RTI Applications | Revenue Department and Revenue (Registration-I) Department

Dear Balakrishna ji,

The HHF Expert Committee has examined the photograph of the two returned Speed Post covers sent with your email dated 21.04.2026. The situation is clear and completely manageable. Please read the following instructions carefully and act on them without delay.

What happened and why:

Both covers were returned by the postal department with the remark "Insufficient address for want to Dept name and full address." The A.P. Secretariat complex at Velagapudi, Amaravati houses dozens of departments across multiple blocks and floors. The postal department requires the specific department name, block number, and floor number to deliver correspondence to the correct destination within the Secretariat. Without these details, Speed Post returns the cover to sender.

An important observation:

The Expert Committee also wishes to point out that the addresses written on the envelopes — simply           "A.P. Secretariat, Velagapudi, Amaravati" — were significantly less detailed than the full addresses already printed inside the RTI applications themselves. Had the address as written inside the RTI application been copied exactly onto the envelope — including the full designation of the Public Information Officer and the complete department name — the postal department would have had sufficient information to attempt delivery and the covers would in all probability not have been returned”.

This is a standing instruction for all future correspondence: For every official document dispatched by post — whether RTI applications, administrative complaints, or any other communication — please ensure that the address written on the outer envelope is copied word for word, without any abbreviation, from the address written inside the document being dispatched.

The good news:

The third RTI application addressed to TUDA, Tirupati has not been returned and has in all likelihood been successfully delivered. Additionally, the applications, IPOs, and SPA copies inside the two returned envelopes are intact and fully reusable. Nothing needs to be reprinted or re-signed.

Step-by-step instructions for re-dispatch:

Step 1 — Confirm the correct full postal addresses:

Before re-dispatching, please verify the exact current postal address — including block number and floor — for both PIOs through either of the following:

(a) Visit the AP Government's official RTI portal at https://rtionline.ap.gov.in — which lists the verified PIO name, designation, and full address for every department; or

(b) Call the AP Secretariat main reception at 0863-2340101 and ask specifically for the postal address, block number, and floor details of the PIO of the Revenue Department and the PIO of the Revenue (Registration-I) Department.

Please do not re-dispatch without first confirming these details. Dispatching again to an unverified address will result in another return.

Step 2 — Prepare two new envelopes:

On each new envelope, write the complete verified address — including the PIO's full designation, complete department name, block number, floor number, Velagapudi, Amaravati, and Pin Code 522 020. Copy this address exactly from the RTI portal or from what is confirmed by telephone. Do not abbreviate or shorten it in any way.

Step 3 — Transfer contents:

Remove the original signed RTI application, the IPO, and the SPA copy from each returned envelope and place them into the new correctly addressed envelopes. No reprinting or re-signing is required.

Step 4 — Re-dispatch by Speed Post with Acknowledgement:

Please note that the Indian Postal Department has discontinued Registered Post service with effect from 01.09.2025 and has merged it with Speed Post. Speed Post now incorporates all the features previously available under Registered Post — including tracking, proof of delivery, and legal admissibility. Accordingly, please re-dispatch both envelopes by Speed Post with Acknowledgement at your nearest post office. The acknowledgement slip returned to the sender will serve as proof of delivery and will be important for calculating the 30-day RTI response deadline.

Step 5 — Inform HHF:

Once both envelopes have been re-dispatched, please send the new postal receipts to HHF by email for our records.

Regards,

HHF Expert Committee

[Helping Hands Foundation]

SUBJECT: Response to Your Email dated 20.04.2026 — Pending Items, Important Caution, and Complaint Letters | OS No. 624/2021 and OS No. 982/2021

 

Dear Balakrishna ji,

The HHF Expert Committee acknowledges your email dated 20.04.2026 with the updated responses to the review items. The Committee has carefully analyzed your replies and the following is its assessment.

Before proceeding to the specific items, the Expert Committee wishes to place on record an important general observation, which is conveyed with all goodwill and in your best interest alone.

A Polite but Firm Caution — Please Read This Carefully:

Over the course of HHF's engagement with your case, the Expert Committee has observed a pattern that is causing avoidable delays and an unnecessary expenditure of the Committee's time. 

On several occasions, specific instructions issued by the Expert Committee have either not been followed, have been addressed incompletely, or have been responded to with vague confirmations such as "Done" without the actual substance being provided. 

The returned RTI covers — which occurred because the address on the envelope was not copied from the address already printed inside the application — are a recent and direct example of an avoidable mistake that cost both time and effort.

The Expert Committee understands that you are managing this matter while dealing with personal and professional commitments, and it has full appreciation for the challenges this creates. However, the instructions issued by the Expert Committee are carefully considered, specific, and purposeful. Each instruction exists for a reason. When instructions are followed carelessly or partially, the consequences — as has been seen — fall on your case, not on the Committee.

The Expert Committee therefore earnestly and respectfully requests you to read every communication from HHF carefully, address every point completely and specifically, and follow every instruction scrupulously before confirming that it has been done. This is not a criticism of your commitment to your case — it is a sincere caution from a team that is deeply invested in helping you succeed.

Please treat this as a standing instruction going forward.

Please also note: The HHF Expert Committee uses AI assistance in preparing its communications and analysis. 

While every effort is made to ensure accuracy, you are advised to independently verify all legal, procedural, and factual information provided by HHF with your advocate before acting upon it. 

HHF's guidance is advisory in nature and is provided in good faith to assist you in navigating the process.

 

Items Satisfactorily Addressed:

Items 1.2, 1.3, 2.1, 2.7, 2.9, 3.1, 3.2, and 3.3 are noted and accepted. The confirmation that the discrepancy figure is 7 feet 3 inches — and not 8 feet — is an important clarification. Please ensure that the Legal Statement of Facts is now corrected to remove any reference to "approximately 8 feet" and replace it with the confirmed figure of "7 feet 3 inches" so that both documents are fully consistent.

The development on Dhanunjayallu — that your advocate has direct contact with him and that he has already met with the advocate to discuss the matter — is a very positive and significant development. Please keep HHF informed of any further progress on this front.

Items Still Requiring Specific Action — Please Address Each Without Exception:

Item 1.5 — Affidavit Reference Line Must Be Deleted:

Your response states that no separate affidavit is needed as the statement is your self-declaration. The Expert Committee understands this. However, the specific concern raised was different and remains unaddressed. The current text of the Legal Statement of Facts explicitly contains the following sentence: "This statement is based entirely on the personal knowledge and direct observation of the undersigned and is submitted in support of the Affidavit filed separately."

If no separate affidavit is being filed, this line must be physically deleted from the document before it is submitted to your advocate. If this sentence remains in the document and the opposing counsel asks the court to produce the separately referenced affidavit, its absence will create a serious and embarrassing gap in the court record. Please delete this specific line immediately and confirm to HHF by email — with a clear, specific statement — that it has been removed from the document.

Item 2.2 — Tape Measurement Details: "Done" Is Not an Answer:

Your response to this item simply states "Done." This is not a sufficient response. HHF asked three specific questions, each of which requires a specific answer. These questions are repeated below. Please answer each one individually and specifically by email:

(a) Who conducted the tape measurement — you personally, your father, a private engineer, or someone else?

(b) On what date was this measurement taken?

(c) Is this measurement documented in any written note, sketch, or photograph — and if yes, is that documentation available to be produced before the court?

These are not procedural formalities. Your advocate will ask you exactly these questions before he can rely on this measurement in any court submission. Please provide the answers.

Items 2.3, 2.4, and 2.5 — PDF Still Awaited:

You have confirmed that the missing tables and content are present in the document but were not visible in the version received by HHF. The PDF was promised but has not yet been received. Please send the PDF version of the Court Objection Summary without further delay. The Expert Committee will review it solely for factual accuracy — the formal court-format drafting will rest with your advocate, as has been agreed. HHF cannot give a final factual clearance on the document until the PDF is reviewed.

Item 2.6 — NGO Layout — Specific Confirmation from Advocate Required:

You have stated that the identity details of the NGO Layout are not available. It is acceptable to seek a court direction for the surveyor to identify and use it as a cross-reference. However, this must be explicitly included as a specific prayer in the objection petition. Please ask your advocate the following specific question and report his exact response to HHF by email: "Can we include a prayer in the petition directing the court-appointed surveyor to identify the adjacent NGO Layout, obtain its approved boundary details, and use them as an independent cross-reference during the fresh survey?"

Item 2.10 — Complete Annexure List: Not Addressed at All:

This item was marked urgent in HHF's previous communication. It has received no response whatsoever in your email dated 20.04.2026. Please prepare a complete numbered list of all annexures — specifying the title of each annexure and confirming whether it is currently available or still being prepared — and share it with HHF by email without further delay.

Regarding Your Request for Complaint Letters:

The Expert Committee confirms that preparing the four administrative complaint letters — addressed to the RDO, Tahsildar, Sub-Registrar's Office (SRO), and District Collector, Tirupati — is Step 5 of HHF's committed action plan and will be fulfilled. Before drafting can commence, please confirm one specific point by email: did any of the concerned authorities — RDO, Tahsildar, SRO, or District Collector — ever send any written acknowledgement, endorsement, or response to the earlier complaints that were filed (before the proofs were misplaced)? If any such response was received even informally, please share a copy. If no response was received at all, please state that clearly. This information is required so that the fresh complaints can correctly reference the prior submissions and their outcome.

---

Summary of All Pending Actions from You:

Item	Action Required	Priority
1.5	Delete affidavit reference line from Legal Statement of Facts and confirm specifically by email	Immediate
2.2	Answer all three specific questions on tape measurement — who, when, documented	Immediate
2.3 / 2.4 / 2.5	Send PDF version of Court Objection Summary	Immediate
2.6	Ask advocate specifically about NGO Layout prayer and report exact response	This week
2.10	Prepare and send complete numbered annexure list to HHF	Immediate
Complaints	Confirm whether any prior authority responses were received — state specifically	Immediate

 

The Expert Committee requests that all immediate items above be addressed within the next two to three days. Please do not send a general acknowledgement — respond to each point specifically, completely, and in writing by email.

 

Regards,

HHF Expert Committee

[I Krishna]

Dear Helping hands team,

I am sorry if I caused any inconvenience — that was not my intention, and I acknowledge I am not very experienced in this process. I am trying my level best with the knowledge I have.

I completely understand that the Helping Hands team is doing this as a gesture of goodwill to help others, and I truly appreciate it.

Note: In my previous email, I included a summary table indicating which points have been completed and which actions are still pending. "Done" means the item has been incorporated into the document — not merely acknowledged verbally. I apologise if I did not communicate this clearly. From now on, I will remove the email history and retain only the latest email for each day. I am attaching the same documents to this email again without any modifications, as done today.

Regarding the RTI posts: I sent the application exactly as mentioned in our document, using the dispatch address column provided. Only after it was returned did I realise that I should have copied the address from the RTI application itself. This reflects that my understanding was different from what was expected.

Regarding your request for complaint letters: With the help of Abdul Sir, I have posted the complaints, but I have not received any response. Unfortunately, the copies of those complaints are also missing. It would be greatly appreciated if you could help me draft the complaint afresh, so that I can initiate the process again.

Item 1.5 — Affidavit Reference Line Must Be Deleted: I can see this item is addressed in my local copy, attaching the same for your reference.

Item 2.2 — Tape Measurement Details: "Done" Is Not an Answer:

Items 2.3, 2.4, and 2.5 — PDF Still Awaited:Please find the PDF attached. I am not sure why it is missing at your end, as I can clearly see it when I attach it. It gets appended to the end of the complete email chain — that may be the reason it is not visible.

Item 2.6 — NGO Layout — Specific Confirmation from Advocate Required: Sure I will update as soon as discussed with Lawyer.

Item 2.10 — Complete Annexure List: Not Addressed at All:  PDF has all Annexure list, that's why I didn't put it separately. I am happy to copy same here 

Note: my local copy detail:

Regards,

Bala

[I Krishna]

Dear Helping hand Experts,

I have posted RTI letters. Please find the attached receipts for your reference.

Thanks

Bala

[Helping Hands Foundation]

Ref. No. : HHF/LT/COMM/2026/05, Date      :  4.5.2026

Ref.         : HHF/LT/COMM/2026/04 dated 06.04.2026; Balakrishna's email dated 22.04.2026; WhatsApp communication dated 02.05.2026 and 03.05.2026.

 

Dear Balakrishna ji,

The HHF Expert Committee acknowledges your detailed email dated 22.04.2026 and your subsequent WhatsApp follow-up on 02.05.2026 and 03.05.2026. The Committee has reviewed your email, the clarifications provided, and the updated documents carefully. This letter constitutes HHF's consolidated response, along with the four administrative complaint letters enclosed herewith as requested.

A.  An Important Acknowledgement from HHF

The Expert Committee wishes to begin with an honest acknowledgement. Your explanation regarding the RTI dispatch address is correct and fair. You followed the Dispatch Address column in Section D of HHF's Advisory Letter dated 06.04.2026 — which stated only 'A.P. Secretariat, Velagapudi, Amaravati – 522 020' without the specific department block or floor details. You did precisely what HHF's own table instructed. The responsibility for the incomplete address in that table rests with HHF, not with you alone, and the Expert Committee acknowledges this without reservation.

HHF has taken note of this for future correspondence. All dispatch addresses in HHF documents going forward will include the complete details necessary for postal delivery. The Expert Committee regrets the inconvenience caused by this oversight and the time lost in re-dispatch.

B.  Items Satisfactorily Resolved — Confirmed and Closed

The following items from HHF's earlier communication are now confirmed as satisfactorily addressed:

Item	Subject	HHF Confirmation
1.2	Plaintiff's address corrected to match plaint	Confirmed closed.
1.3	Opposite party's formal name used throughout	Confirmed closed.
2.1	Measurement figure confirmed as 7 feet 3 inches	Confirmed. All references to 'approximately 8 feet' must now be replaced with '7 feet 3 inches' in the Legal Statement of Facts.
1.5	Affidavit reference line deleted from Legal Statement	Confirmed. The Purpose section now correctly reads that the statement is based on personal knowledge and direct observation only — with no reference to a separately filed affidavit.
2.2	Tape measurement details provided	Confirmed. Measurement conducted by Shri Inakollu Balakrishna and his father Shri I.V. Krishna Reddy on 14.03.2026 using a standard measuring tape on the ground. Incorporated in the court document.
2.10	Complete annexure list provided	Confirmed. Annexures A through I are now on record with HHF — see Section C below for details.
2.3/2.4/2.5	Tables and content confirmed present in PDF	PDF received. HHF notes the tables were present in the PDF version. These items are accepted as addressed, subject to the advocate's review of the PDF for court submission.
2.7	Dhanunjayallu — advocate has direct contact	Confirmed positive development. Please keep HHF informed of progress.
3.1/3.2/3.3	Consistency, language, and submission instruction	Confirmed closed.

 

C.  Annexure List — Now on HHF Record

The following annexures have been identified and are now formally on HHF's record:

Annexure	Description
Annexure A	Photographs of broken compound wall (~2 feet) at North side of Plot 1 — currently used incorrectly by the surveyor as a reference point.
Annexure B	Private engineer's FMB sketch for Field No. 357 (Scale 1" = 66') showing Points G and G(S) with 7 feet 3 inches difference marked.
Annexure C	iPhone GPS coordinate screenshots taken at Points D, G, and G(S).
Annexure D	Haversine formula calculation sheets showing step-by-step distance computation.
Annexure E	RTI application receipt for certified copy of G.O. No. 490 (December 2025).
Annexure F	RTI application receipt for certified copy of G.O. Ms. No. 2 dated 02.01.2026.
Annexure G	Photographs of South side of Plot 1 showing permanent buildings and compound wall.
Annexure H	Photographs of permanent structure on Plot Nos. 26/27 showing measurement availability.
Annexure I	Registered sale document of Plot 31 (Sambhavi Layout) showing dual survey numbers and other land on South side.

 

D.  Items Still Pending — Action Required

The following two items remain open and must be addressed:

D.1  Item 2.6 — NGO Layout Prayer:

Please ask your advocate specifically whether a prayer can be included in the objection petition directing the court-appointed surveyor to identify the adjacent NGO Layout, obtain its approved boundary details, and use them as an independent cross-reference during the fresh survey. Report his exact response to HHF by email.

D.2  Item 2.9 — Local Influence Allegation:

Please discuss the inclusion of the local influence allegation in Objection 1E with your advocate before the petition is finalised. Report his advice to HHF. As cautioned earlier, this allegation must not be included without your advocate's specific guidance and without supporting evidence.

E.  Administrative Complaint Letters — Enclosed Herewith

You have confirmed that the earlier complaints filed with the assistance of Abdul sir were posted but no response was received, and that the copies have been misplaced. The Expert Committee has noted this and has prepared four fresh administrative complaint letters, enclosed with this communication as Enclosures 1 through 4, addressed to the following authorities:

Encl.	Authority	Subject of Complaint
1	Revenue Divisional Officer (RDO), Tirupati	Encroachment of government land by Sambhavi Layout on Survey Nos. 193/8 and 193/9 — request for inquiry and action under G.O. No. 490.
2	Tahsildar, Tirupati Rural Mandal	Illegal registration of plots in Sambhavi Layout on government / incorrect survey numbers — request for revenue record correction.
3	Sub-Registrar's Office (SRO), Tirupati Rural Mandal	Fraudulent registration of plots with incorrect survey numbers — complaint under Section 77A read with Rule 181-A and G.O. Ms. No. 2 dated 02.01.2026.
4	District Collector, Tirupati	Comprehensive complaint on encroachment of government land allotted to SAAP under G.O. No. 490 — request for district-level committee inquiry.

 

All four complaints are to be signed by your father, Shri I.V. Krishna Reddy, in his capacity as your authorised SPA holder. Each complaint must be dispatched by Speed Post with Acknowledgement to the respective authority. A copy of the SPA must be enclosed with each complaint. Please retain all Speed Post receipts carefully.

Balakrishna ji, the Expert Committee is pleased with the progress made since the beginning of this engagement. The case is now on firm procedural ground. The four complaint letters enclosed herewith represent the next significant step in the administrative track running parallel to the court proceedings. Please sign, enclose the SPA copy, and dispatch all four by Speed Post with Acknowledgement at the earliest — and inform HHF by email once done.

Please respond to the two pending items in Section D by email at your earliest convenience.

Regards,

HHF Expert Committee

Enclosures (Separate Document):

Enclosure 1 — Complaint to Revenue Divisional Officer (RDO), Tirupati

Enclosure 2 — Complaint to Tahsildar, Tirupati Rural Mandal

Enclosure 3 — Complaint to Sub-Registrar's Office (SRO), Tirupati Rural Mandal

Enclosure 4 — Complaint to District Collector, Tirupati

Note: All four complaints to be signed by Shri I.V. Krishna Reddy (SPA Holder). Each to be accompanied by a copy of the SPA and dispatched by Speed Post with Acknowledgement. Retain all receipts.

[I Krishna]

Dear Helping hands team,

I hope you are doing well.

Upto now I got one RTI reply for Go no 490, but not received any reply from Tuda and registeration related GO, 30 days completed, please help me what is the next step to do on this.

Thanks for your valuable time and inputs 

Regards

Bala