APHC010146562020 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3233] THURSDAY,THE TWENTY EIGHTH DAY OF AUGUST TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE B KRISHNA MOHAN WRIT PETITION NO: 8931/2020 Between: 1. MULLAGARI RATNA KUMARI, W/O. CHANTIYYA AGE 32 YEARS, OCC. AGRICULTURAL LABOUR R/O. VIDHYADHARAPALLI, PRAGADAVARAM VILLAGE CHINTALAPUDI MANDAL, WEST GODAVARI DISTRICT 2. ELLA LAKSHMI, , W/O. SRINU AGE 37 YEARS, OCC. AGRICULTURAL LABOUR R/O. VIDHYADHARAPALLI, PRAGADAVARAM VILLAGE CHINTALAPUDI MANDAL, WEST GODAVARI DISTRICT 3. BETHAMPUDI HEMA LATHA, W/O. YOHANU AGE 36 YEARS, OCC. AGRICULTURAL LABOUR R/O. VIDHYADHARAPALLI, PRAGADAVARAM VILLAGE CHINTALAPUDI MANDAL, WEST GODAVARI DISTRICT 4. BOLLAVARAPU KUMARI, W/O. KRISHNA AGE 33 YEARS, OCC. AGRICULTURAL LABOUR R/O. VIDHYADHARAPALLI, PRAGADAVARAM VILLAGE CHINTALAPUDI MANDAL, WEST GODAVARI DISTRICT 5. NARADALA VIJAYAMMA, W/O. RAMU AGE 47 YEARS, OCC. AGRICULTURAL LABOUR R/O. VIDHYADHARAPALLI, PRAGADAVARAM VILLAGE CHINTALAPUDI MANDAL, WEST GODAVARI DISTRICT 6. BATHULA DAYAMANI, , W/O. YOHANU AGE 40 YEARS, OCC. AGRICULTURAL LABOUR R/O. VIDHYADHARAPALLI, PRAGADAVARAM VILLAGE CHINTALAPUDI MANDAL, WEST 2 BKM,J W.P.NO.8931 OF 2020 GODAVARI DISTRICTT 7. EEDI RANI, W/O. VENKATESWARA RAO AGE 40 YEARS, OCC. AGRICULTURAL LABOUR R/O. VIDHYADHARAPALLI, PRAGADAVARAM VILLAGE CHINTALAPUDI MANDAL, WEST GODAVARI DISTRICT 8. PASUPULETI RAMANA, , W/O. SAMBAYYA AGE 37 YEARS, OCC. AGRICULTURAL LABOUR R/O. VIDHYADHARAPALLI, PRAGADAVARAM VILLAGE CHINTALAPUDI MANDAL, WEST GODAVARI DISTRICT 9. NADDI KANTAMMA, , W/O. NADDI RAMU AGE 50 YEARS, OCC. AGRICULTURAL LABOUR R/O. VIDHYADHARAPALLI, PRAGADAVARAM VILLAGE CHINTALAPUDI MANDAL, WEST GODAVARI DISTRICT 10. EEDI MERI RANI, W/O. SRINU AGE 38 YEARS, OCC. AGRICULTURAL LABOUR R/O. VIDHYADHARAPALLI, PRAGADAVARAM VILLAGE CHINTALAPUDI MANDAL, WEST GODAVARI DISTRIC 11. KALI KAVITHA, W/O. KRISHNA AGE 36 YEARS, OCC. AGRICULTURAL LABOUR R/ O. VIDHYADHARAPALLI, PRAGADAVARAM VILLAGE CHINTALAPUDI MANDAL, WEST GODAVARI DISTRICT 12. CHEVURI DEVI, , W/O. PRAKASA RAO AGE 34 YEARS, OCC. AGRICULTURAL LABOUR R/O. VIDHYADHARAPALLI, PRAGADAVARAM VILLAGE CHINTALAPUDI MANDAL, WEST GODAVARI DISTRICT 13. UPALA SHANTA KUMARI, W/O. TIRUPATI RAO AGE 40 YEARS, OCC. AGRICULTURAL LABOUR R/ O. VIDHYADHARAPALLI, PRAGADAVARAM VILLAGE CHINTALAPUDI MANDAL, WEST GODAVARI DISTRICT 14. SARABU SUJANA, , W/O. BHASKARA RAO AGE 32 YEARS, OCC. AGRICULTURAL LABOUR R/ O. VIDHYADHARAPALLI, PRAGADAVARAM VILLAGE CHINTALAPUDI MANDAL, WEST GODAVARI DISTRICT 15. BODDIKOLLA MARTHAMMA, , W/O. VENKATESWARA RAO AGE 42 YEARS, OCC. AGRICULTURAL LABOUR R/O. 3 BKM,J W.P.NO.8931 OF 2020 VIDHYADHARAPALLI, PRAGADAVARAM VILLAGE CHINTALAPUDI MANDAL, WEST GODAVARI DISTRICT 16. BOLLAVARAPU SWATHI, , W/O. RAMA KRISHNA AGE 37 YEARS, OCC. AGRICULTURAL LABOUR R/ O. VIDHYADHARAPALLI, PRAGADAVARAM VILLAGE CHINTALAPUDI MANDAL, WEST GODAVARI DISTRICT ...PETITIONER(S) AND 1. STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY REVENUE DEPARTMENT SECRETARIAT BUILDINGS, AMARAVATHI, GUNTUR DISTRICT 2. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, WEST GODAVARI DISTRICT, ELURU 3. THE REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER ELURU, , WEST GODAVARI DISTRICT 4. THE TAHSILDAR, , CHINTALAPUDI MANDAL CHINTALAPUDI, WEST GODAVARI DISTRICT ...RESPONDENT(S): Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased topleased to issue an appropriate order or direction more particularly, one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the respondents in resorting to dispossess the petitioners from their house sites in an extent of Ac. 0.03 cents each bearing Plot Nos. 12, 3, 13, 20, 22, 8, 15, 2, 5, 24, 18, 1, 10, 6, 17 and 8 respectively situated in Sy. No. 1005 of Velagalapalli Village, H/o. Pragadavaram, Chintalapudi Mandal, West Godavari District without following due process of law and in resorting to allot the said land in favor of others as illegal, arbitrary, high handed, ultra-virus, against to the principles of natural justice apart from being violative of Article 14, and 300-A of the Constitution of India and consequentially the respondents not to dispossess the petitioners form the above house sites and not to allot the above said land to others in the interest of justice and pass IA NO: 1 OF 2020 Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to 4 BKM,J W.P.NO.8931 OF 2020 direct the respondents not to dispossess the petitioners from their house sites in an extent of Ac. 0.03 cents each bearing Plot Nos. 12, 3, 13, 20, 22, 8, 15, 2, 5, 24, 18, 1, 10, 6, 17 and 8 respectively situated in Sy. No. 1005 of Velagalapalli Village, H/o. Pragadavaram, Chintalapudi Mandal, West Godavari District District pending disposal of the above writ petition in the interest of justice and pass IA NO: 1 OF 2021 Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased To vacate the interim order granted on 20-08-2020 in WP No 8931/2020 Counsel for the Petitioner(S): 1. KAMBHAMPATI RAMESH BABU Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. GP FOR REVENUE The Court made the following: 5 BKM,J W.P.NO.8931 OF 2020 ORDER:- Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned Assistant Government Pleader for the respondents. 2. This writ petition was filed questioning the action of the respondents in resorting to dispossess the petitioners from their house sites in an extent of Ac.0.03 cents each bearing plot Nos.12, 3, 13, 20, 22, 8, 15, 2, 5, 24, 18, 1, 10, 6, 17 and 8 respectively situated in Sy.No.1005 of Velagalapalli Village, H/o.Pragadavaram Chintalapudi Mandal, West Godavari District, without following due process of law. 3. On the other hand, the learned Assistant Government Pleader, relying upon the counter of the 4th respondent, submits that these 16 petitioners had pattas in their hands, but they have not occupied the respective plots and they were kept vacant for a long time, without making use for construction of houses and they never came into the possession of the subject house site plots as all the patta holders violated the conditions of the grant of pattas, and all of them are having their own dwelling houses in the same village, as detailed under with corresponding assessment numbers: Sl.No Name of the petitioner Panchayat Assessment No in respect of their own house 1. Mullagari Ratna Kumari, w/o. Chantiyya Residing in her mother-in-law’s house at pragadavaram as her husband is the only son House assessment No.1792 2. Ella Lakshmi, w/o. Srinu House assessment No.1805 3. Bethampudi Hemalatha, w/o. Yohanu House assessment No.1693 6 BKM,J W.P.NO.8931 OF 2020 4. Bollavarapu Kumari, w/o. Krishna House assessment No.1782 5. Naradala Vijayamma, w/o. Ramu House assessment No.1803 6. Bathula Dayamani, , w/o. Yohanu House assessment No.1807 7. Eedi Rani, w/o. Venkateswara Rao House assessment No.1786 8. Pasupuleti Ramana, w/o. Sambayya Not residing in Village 9. Naddi Kantamma, w/o. Naddi Ramu House assessment No.1873 10. Eedi Meri Rani, w/o. Srinu House assessment No.1811 11. Kali Kavitha, w/o. Krishna House assessment No.1783 12. Chevuri Devi, w/o. Prakasa Rao House assessment No.1813 13. Upala Shanta Kumari, w/o. Tirupati Rao Not residing in Village 14. Sarabu Sujana, w/o. Bhaskara Rao Not residing in Village 15. Boddikolla Marthamma, w/o. Venkateswara Rao Not residing in Village 16. Bollavarapu Swathi, w/o. Rama Krishna House assessment No.1801 4. The petitioners are having their own houses for living, but they are willfully trying to obstruct the welfare scheme of the State to allot the houses to the poor. Those house site plots of the petitioners are liable for cancellation as per law. 5. In view of the above said facts and circumstances, as it is the case of the respondents that the petitioners failed to occupy the subject plots under the pattas granted by violating the terms and conditions of the said pattas and as they are in occupation of their own houses, the respondent authorities 7 BKM,J W.P.NO.8931 OF 2020 concerned are directed to deal with the cancellation of the pattas granted in favour of the petitioners by following the due procedure and the subject plots shall be dealt with strictly in accordance with law in public interest. 6. Accordingly, the Writ Petition is disposed of. Interim order, if any, deemed to have been vacated. There shall be no order as to costs. As a sequel, Interlocutory Applications pending, if any, shall stand closed. _________________________ JUSTICE B KRISHNA MOHAN 28.08.2025 LSP 8 BKM,J W.P.NO.8931 OF 2020 328 THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE B KRISHNA MOHAN WRIT PETITION NO: 8931/2020 28.08.2025 LSP