Two acres bought in 2006 sat in two other names last year. A 1 June deletion is still a recommendation, not an entry.

Retired DSP Bhaskar Naidu bought two acres in survey number 312, Kandukur village, Kosigi mandal, in 2006. Last year an online check showed the same land in two other names. That is the start of the file. It is not the end of the revenue action.

He complained at Kosigi police. Nobody acted until he wrote to the Director General of Police. Kosigi police then booked Muralimohan Reddy — described as YSRCP MLA Balanagi Reddy’s brother-in-law — and Gangadhar Swamy. A booking after a DGP letter is a police case. It is not a conviction. This desk will not write FIR sections that are not on the card.

The pair then mortgaged the same land and took ₹62 lakh from different banks. Different is the word. No bank is named. This desk will not invent a lender to fill a caption. Bhaskar complained again after the loans came to light. A second complaint is a second paper. It is not a court order.

The Adoni sub-collector and the Kosigi tahsildar inquired. On 1 June last year they recommended deleting the two acres from those two passbooks. A year later nothing has been done. Recommended is the verb. Deleted is not. A year is the delay. This desk will not turn a recommendation into an entry that has not been written.

Bhaskar asked that survey number 312 be entered in the disputes register. The Village Revenue Officer and the Revenue Inspector were asked to inquire instead of the Revenue Divisional Officer holding the inquiry himself. He was never called once on the disputes-register plea. Never called is his sentence. It sits on the public card as a complaint about process, not as a finding that the register has been written.

The filing is 21 August 2026, 06:03 IST, Kosigi in Kurnool district. Land-grab and delayed revenue action as reported. Not a conviction. Not a court order. Not a named bank. The two acres, the 2006 purchase, the online names, the DGP letter, the two booked men, the MLA relationship as described, the ₹62 lakh mortgage, the 1 June recommendation, the year of inaction, the disputes-register plea, the VRO and RI inquiry instead of the RDO — that is the whole of the public file.

What this desk will not do is add a section of the Indian Penal Code, a bank branch, or a judge’s paragraph. Those extras are not here. A retired DSP can buy land in 2006 and still be asking, in 2026, for a deletion that was recommended a year ago. A brother-in-law line on a police booking is a description of a relationship. It is not a finding against the MLA. Balanagi Reddy is named on the card only as the relative. This desk will keep him there.

Kosigi police acted after the DGP was written to. Revenue recommended a deletion and then stopped. The disputes register is the paper Bhaskar asked for and has not, in these facts, seen himself called onto. Two acres. Survey 312. Kandukur. ₹62 lakh. 1 June last year. A year of nothing.

Until a passbook is actually corrected, the online names and the mortgage sit on the same land. Until a court writes, the booking remains a booking. The honest picture is a 2006 sale, a last-year online shock, a delayed police case, a bank loan on disputed ground, and a revenue recommendation that has been allowed to age.