APHC010168882025 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: 8817/2025 Between: Jinka Chendrayudu and Others ...PETITIONER(S) AND The State Of Andhra Pradesh and Others ...RESPONDENT(S) Counsel for the Petitioner(S): 1. B V APARNA LAKSHMI 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: 8817/2025 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 5th respondent-Tahsildar in issuing the orders in M.C.No.56/2025 dated 13.03.2025 under Section 143 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 restraining the petitioners from entering into their land admeasuring Ac.1.73 Cents in Sy.No.236/A1 and Ac.5.02 Cts. in Sy.No.236/A2 situated at Rameshwaram Village of Proddutur Mandal, YSR Kadapa District and thereby not permitting the petitioners to harvest the standing paddy crop over the subject land as illegal, arbitrary, unconstitutional and against the principles of natural justice and consequently set aside the orders in M.C.No.56/2025 dated 13.03.2025 passed by the 5th respondent in the interest of justice 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 respondents issued proceedings dated 13.03.2025 under Section 164 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (BNSS) restraining the petitioners from entering into the subject property i.e., an extent of Ac.1.73 cents in Sy.No.236/A1 and Ac.5.02 cents in Sy.No.236/A2 situated at Rameshwaram Village, Proddutur Mandal, YSR Kadapa District and not permitted the petitioners to harvest the standing crop over the subject property. Hence, the present Writ Petition. 3 4. On the other hand, learned Assistant Government Pleader for the respondents submits that once the competent authority issued proceedings under Section 164 of BNSS, that proceedings should be assailed by way of Criminal Revision Petition not by way of Writ Petition. 5. Having regard to the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned Assistant Government Pleader for the respondents, this court observed that this Writ Petition is not maintainable. Accordingly, the Writ Petition is dismissed, granting liberty to the petitioners to initiate appropriate proceedings as per law. There shall be no order as to costs. As a sequel miscellaneous application, pending, if any, shall also stand closed. ________________________________ VENKATESWARLU NIMMAGADDA, J 04.04.2025 TTPPSS 4 204 HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE VENKATESWARLU NIMMAGADDA WRIT PETITION NO: 8817 of 2025 04.04.2025 TTPPSS