APHC010154492025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3329] MONDAY ,THE SEVENTH DAY OF APRIL TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE VENKATESWARLU NIMMAGADDA WRIT PETITION NO: 8024/2025 Between: V.rangamma, and Others ...PETITIONER(S) AND The State Of Andhra Pradesh and Others ...RESPONDENT(S) Counsel for the Petitioner(S): 1. M HEMALATHA Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. GP FOR REVENUE The Court made the following: 2 THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE VENKATESWARLU NIMMAGADDA WRIT PETITION NO: 8024/2025 ORDER: This writ petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of the India seeking the following reliefs:- “to issue a writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the respondents in interfering with petitioner’s possession and enjoyment over an extent of Ac.0.02 cents each situated in Sy.No.117/1, Mangalam, Tirupati District as illegal, arbitrary, unjust, without jurisdiction and in violation of Art 14 of the Constitution of India and consequently direct the respondents not to interfere with petitioner’s possession over an extent of Ac.0.02 cents each situated in Sy.No.117/1, Mangalam Tirupati District without following the due process of law and pass such other order.” 2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned Assistant Government Pleader for the respondents. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioners are possessors of the land admeasuring to an extent of Ac.0.02 cents situated in Sy.No.117/1, Mangalam, Tirupati, Tirupati District. She further submits that the petitioners were issued possession certificate on 31.12.2021 by the 4th respondent admitting the possession of the petitioners in respect of the plot numbers mentioned therein. While so, the respondents herein without adhering to the due procedure and interfering with the possession 3 and enjoyment of the property of the petitioners is illegal, arbitrary and highhanded action on the part of the respondents. 4. On the other hand, learned Assistant Government Pleader for the respondents furnished the written instructions issued by the 4th respondent, wherein it is stated as follows: “The petitioners are claiming the land by virtue of purported possession certificates issued by the then Tahsildar, Tirupati Urban. It is submitted that as per report of field staff, nobody is in possession and enjoyment of the land residing on grounds as presented by the petitioners at any point of time, therefore the purported possession certificates are liable for cancellation. As per the instructions of the Government, possession certificates/house sites were issued to the persons who are selected as beneficiary under Government Housing Program. In the instant case the land is vacant on ground, no layout was formed, and approved by competent authority. Hence, the purported possession certificates are liable for cancellation. The petitioners cannot squat on the property belonging to the Government.” 5. Learned Assistant Government Pleader for the respondents further submits that the possession of the property was not given to the petitioners for the reason the subject property was neither demarcated as plots by any authority for allotting house sites 4 in favour of the weaker sections nor an approved layout was formed converting the land as plots. In the absence of the same, granting possession certificate with plot numbers, is contrary to the facts and the possession certificates which were held by the petitioners are not appears to be genuine. 6. Having considered the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned Assistant Government Pleader for the respondents, this court deems it appropriate to dispose of the Writ Petition. Therefore, if the petitioners are in possession of the subject property, the respondents are directed not to interfere with the petitioners’ peaceful possession and enjoyment of the subject property, without following due process of law. 7. With the above direction, the Writ Petition is disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs. As a sequel miscellaneous application, pending, if any, shall also stand closed. ________________________________ VENKATESWARLU NIMMAGADDA, J 07.04.2025 TTPPSS 5 158 HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE VENKATESWARLU NIMMAGADDA WRIT PETITION NO:8024 of 2025 07.04.2025 TTPPSS