Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Andhra Pradesh · body

2025 DAILYLAW 12983 (AP)

Chepena Ganapathi Rao v. The State of Andhra Pradesh

WP/9575/2020 · 2025-04-08

T C D Sekhar

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

1 APHC010154972020 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3505] TUESDAY, THE EIGHTH DAY OF APRIL TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE T.C.D.SEKHAR WRIT PETITION NO: 9575/2020 Between: Chepena Ganapathi Rao and others ...PETITIONER(S) AND The State of Andhra Pradesh and others ...RESPONDENT(S) Counsel for the Petitioner(S): 1. KRISHNA RAO MODHALAVALASA Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. GP FOR REVENUE The Court made the following: 2 ORDER: 1. It is the case of the petitioners that they are in possession and enjoyment of land admeasuring an extent of Ac.1.50 cents in Sy.No.71/1, situated at Korapam revenue Village, Korapam Grama Panchayath, Amadalavalasa Mandal, Srikakulam District. 2. It is further case of the petitioners that the said land is classified as ‘Gramakantam’ in the revenue records. It is further case of the petitioners that the Government issued G.O.Ms.No.187, dated 27.05.2015 whereunder directed the concerned to delete the Gramakantam lands from the list of prohibited properties issued under Section 22-A of Registration Act, 1908. Despite the same, the respondents are trying to interfere with their possession without issuing any notice. Questioning the said action of the respondents in trying to dispossess the petitioners without following due process of law, the petitioners approached this Court by filing the present writ petition. 3. While ordering notice, this Court, on 29.05.2020, directed the respondents not to dispossess the petitioners from 3 the subject lands without following due process of law. The said interim order is subsisting till today. 4. When the matter is taken up for hearing, learned Government Pleader for Revenue represented that, in view of the interim order dated 29.05.2020, the respondents have not initiated any action against the petitioners. 5. Taking into consideration of the submissions made by both the counsel, this Court feels it is appropriate to dispose of the writ petition by directing the respondents not to interfere with the possession of the petitioners over the subject lands except in accordance with law. 6. With the above direction, this Writ Petition is disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs. As a sequel, pending applications, if any, shall stand closed. _____________________ JUSTICE T.C.D.SEKHAR Dt.08.04.2025 KGR