APHC010167702025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3329] FRIDAY ,THE FOURTH DAY OF APRIL TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE VENKATESWARLU NIMMAGADDA WRIT PETITION NO: 8836/2025 Between: V. Gunaseelan ...PETITIONER AND The State Of Andhra Pradesh and Others ...RESPONDENT(S) Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. S PARINEETA 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: 8836/2025 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 action on the part of the respondent Nos.2 to 4 in changing the classification of the land in an extant of Ac.0.62 Cents in Sy.No.16/5, Palarlapalle Revenue Village fields, Kuppam Mandal, Chittoor District from DKT to Anadheenam without putting the petitioner on notice or following due process of law as arbitrary, illegal, colorable exercise of power apart from being violative of fundamental and Constitutional rights guaranteed to the petitioner under Articles 14, 19, 21 and 300-A of the Constitution of India and consequently direct the respondent Nos.2 to 4 to replace the classification of the land in an extant of Ac.0.62 cents in Sy.No.16/5, Palarlapalle Revenue Village fields, Kuppam Mandal, Chittoor District from Anadheenam to DKT and pass such other order.” 2. During hearing, learned counsel for the petitioner, without touching the merits of the case, requested this Court to issue a direction to the respondents not to dispossess the petitioner from the subject land without following due process of law. 3. Learned Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue submits that the subject lands are reserved for communal purpose and the same are vacant. He further submits that the subject lands are resumed in favour of the Government in the year 2008 and till 3 date the petitioner never filed any appeal before the Competent Authority. He further submits that if the petitioner is in possession of the subject property, the respondents would follow due process of law. 4. Having regard to the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned Assistant Government Pleader for the respondents, it is observed that when the petitioner is in settled possession and enjoyment of the subject property, he cannot be dispossessed, without following due process of law in view of the law declared by the Apex Court in “Rame Gowda (dead) by L.Rs. v. M.Varadappa Naidu (Dead) by L.Rs.1”. Therefore, if the petitioner is in possession of the subject property, the respondents are directed not to dispossess the petitioner from the subject property, except by following due process of law. 5. 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 0044..0044..22002255 TTPPSS 1 2004 (1) SCC 769 4 255 HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE VENKATESWARLU NIMMAGADDA WRIT PETITION NO:8836 of 2025 04.04.2025 TTPPSS