APHC010170722025 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: 8783/2025 Between: Barme Sreenivasulu and Others ...PETITIONER(S) AND The State Of Andhra Pradesh and Others ...RESPONDENT(S) Counsel for the Petitioner(S): 1. J.JYOTHI 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: 8783/2025 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 respondent Nos.3 and 4 trying to forcibly dispossess the petitioners from their land to an extent of Ac.4.00 cents in Sy.No.278/A, Kaminahal Village, Halaharvi Mandal, Kurnool District, without any powers contemplated under any law to favour respondent Nos.5 and 6 as illegal, arbitrary and against to the principles of natural justice and consequently direct the respondents not to interfere with the peaceful possession of the petitioners’ land to an extent of Ac.4.00 cents in Sy.No.278/A, Kaminahal Village, Halaharvi Mandal, Kurnool District and pass such other order.” 2. During hearing, learned counsel for the petitioners, without touching the merits of the case, requested this Court to issue a direction to the respondents not to interfere with the petitioners’ peaceful possession and enjoyment of the subject property without following due process of law. 3. Learned Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue submits that, if the petitioners are 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 3 the respondents, it is observed that when the petitioners are in settled possession and enjoyment of the subject property, they 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 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, except by 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 4 200 HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE VENKATESWARLU NIMMAGADDA WRIT PETITION NO:8783 of 2025 04.04.2025 TTPPSS