APHC010173032025 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: 8891/2025 Between: M Govindareddy ...PETITIONER AND The State Of Andhra Rpadesh and Others ...RESPONDENT(S) Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. SURESH KUMAR REDDY KALAVA Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. GP FOR REVENUE The Court made the following: THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE VENKATESWARLU NIMMAGADDA WRIT PETITION NO: 8891/2025 O R D E R: 1. This writ petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India to issue a Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of respondents in interfering and threatening the petitioner to dispossess from his peaceful possession and enjoyment of the land admeasuring to an extent of Ac.1.60 cents in Sy.No.659/3 situated at Javvaipalli Village, V.Kota Mandal, Chittoor District, without issuing any notice or without following due process of law as illegal and arbitrary; consequently, direct the respondents not to interfere with the peaceful possession of the petitioner’s subject property. 2. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Government Pleader for the respondents. 3. 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 interfere with the peaceful possession and enjoyment of the subject property of the petitioner without following due process of law. 4. Learned Government Pleader for Revenue furnished written instructions issued by respondent No.3, wherein, it is stated that the respondent authorities are not interfering with the peaceful possession and enjoyment of the subject property of the petitioner’s. He further submits that if the respondents intend to interfere with the subject property of the petitioner, they would follow due process of law. 5. It is settled proposition of law that, when the petitioner is in settled possession and enjoyment of the property, the petitioner 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 interfere with the peaceful possession and enjoyment of the subject property of the petitioner, except by due process of law. 6. With the above direction, the writ petition is disposed of at the stage of admission with the consent of both the counsel. No costs. Consequently, miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shall also stand closed. _____________________________________ JUSTICE VENKATESWARLU NIMMAGADDA Date:04.04.2025 BSP 12004 (1) SCC 769 158 THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE VENKATESWARLU NIMMAGADDA WRIT PETITION NO:8891/2025 Date:04.04.2025 BSP