APHC010176022025 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: 9021/2025 Between: Yerubandi Satyavathi and Others ...PETITIONER(S) AND The State Of Ap and Others ...RESPONDENT(S) Counsel for the Petitioner(S): 1. P RAJESH BABU Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. GP FOR REVENUE 2 THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE VENAKTESWARLU NIMMAGADDA WRIT PETITION NO.9021 OF 2025 This Court made the following ORDER: 1. This writ petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking the following relief: “to issue a writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of WRIT OF MANDAMUS declaring the action ON THE PART OF Respondent No.3 in placing a Hoarding / Banner on 02.04.2025 in the lands of the Petitioners i.e., a total extent of Ac.5.15 cents (Ac.1.03 cents + Ac.1.03 cents + Ac.1.03 cents + Ac.2.06 cents) in Sy.No.629/3, Kondagunturu Village, Rajanagaram Mandal, East Godavari District, stating that the crop raised in the said land as if illegal as it belongs to Government and the crop will be auctioned by way of publication, though the said land belong to the Petitioners who are pattadars of their respective extents doing cultivaton, as such without issuing any notice to take possession from the Petitioners is nothing but unlawful, highhanded, illegal and in violation of the principles of natural justice and Fundamental Rights of the Petitioners guaranteeed under Article 14 and 300-A and of the Consittution of India, by consequently directing Respondent No.3 not ot take possession of the land of the Petitioners i.e., a total extent of Ac.5.15 cents(Ac.1.03 cents + Ac.1.03 cents + Ac.1.03 cents + Ac.2.06 cents) in Sy.No.629/3, Kondagunturu Village, Rajanagaram Mandal, East Godavari District, and pass…” 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 dispossess the petitioner from their land, without following due process of law. 3 3. Learned Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue, admitted that the petitioners are continuing in possession of their land and the respondents authorities would follow due process of law and requested to pass appropriate orders. 4. Learned counsel for the Petitoners submits that the Petitioners are the absolute owners of the landed property of their respective extens i.e., Ac.1.03 cents + Ac.1.03 cents + Ac.1.03 cents + Ac.2.06 cents a total exent of Ac.5.15 cents in Sy.No.629/3, Kondagunturu Village, Rajanagaram Mandal, East Godavari District and their names were entered in the revenue records and the petitoners are given their respective pattadar passbooks and title deeds. 5. While so, in the year 2022 when all the adjacent land owners have given their respective lands for mining lease, petitioners have also given the same to third parteis who obtained mining license for 5 years, which will complete by the year 2027. Since the mining activity having been completed before the tenure fixed in the agreement, the land was again handed over back to the petitoners. As such, petiitoners all together collectively raised paddy crop in the above said land which is now ready to cut. 4 6. Lerned counsel for the Petitioners further submits that Respondent No.3 without having any right, priority or authority placed a caution notice by way of a banner / hoarding displaying that the raising of crop is illegal and it is the Government Property and that therefore the crop will be sold in public auction. Hence the Writ Petition. 7. When the petitioners are in settled possession and enjoyment of the property, the respondents are not entitled to interfere with the possession and enjoyment of the petitioners and such highhanded action of the respondents would amount to depriving the petitioner’s constitutional right guaranteed under Article 300-A of the Constitution of India, besides violation of Article 14 of the Constitution of India. Even assuming for a moment that these petitioners’ possession is illegal, still, the petitioners are required to be afforded an opportunity before taking appropriate action and when the petitioners are in enjoyment of the property, they cannot be dispossessed, without following due process of law. Therefore, the respondents are directed not to dispossess the petitioners from their property, except by due process of law. The respondents are further directed to allow the petitioners to harvest their crop for the present agriculture/Rabi season. 5 With the above direction, the writ petition is disposed of, with the consent of both the counsel. No costs. The miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shall also stand closed. ______________________________________ JUSTICE VENKATESWARLU NIMMAGADDA 04.04.2025 krk 6 THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE VENAKTESWARLU NIMMAGADDA 102 WRIT PETITION NO.9021 OF 2025 04.04.2025 krk