APHC010178102019 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3329] THURSDAY,THE SEVENTEENTH DAY OF JULY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE VENKATESWARLU NIMMAGADDA WRIT PETITION NO: 7650/2019 Between: 1. Y.VENKATESWARA RAO, S/O. VEERAIAH, 57 YEARS, OCC AGRICULTURE, R/O. H.NO.3-120, VEERULA DONKA, GOSALA VILLAGE, PENAMALURU MANDAL, KRISHNA DISTRICT. ...PETITIONER AND 1. THE STATE OF AP, , REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, PANCHAYAT RAJ DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT BUILDINGS, VELAGAPUDI, AMARAVATI, GUNTUR DISTRICT. 2. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR PTS, KRISHNA DISTRICT AT MACHILIPATNAM. 3. THE GOSALA GRAM PANCHAYAT, GOSALA, PENAMALURU MANDAL, KRISHNA DISTRICT, REP. BY ITS EXECUTIVE OFFICER. ...RESPONDENT(S): 2 The Court made the following ORDER: This writ petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of the India seeking the following reliefs:- “to to issue an appropriate writ, order or direction more in the nature of Mandamus, declaring the action of the 3rd espondent in trying to interfere with the peaceful possession and enjoyment of the Cattle Shed raised in an extent of Ac. 0.02 cents bearing H.No. 5-92 of Gosala Village, Penamaluru mandal, Krishna District and trying to dispossess the petitioner from his possession and enjoyment without putting him on notice or giving an opportunity or following the procedure contemplated under law, as illegal, arbitrary, violative of Articles 14, 19, 21 and 300-A of the Constitution of India and consequently forbear the respondents from interfering with peaceful possession and enjoyment of the aforesaid land by the petitioner, 1. 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 his land, without following due process of law. 2. Learned Assistant Government Pleader for Respondents, admitted that the petitioner is in continuous possession of subject land and the respondents’ authorities would follow due process of law and requested to pass appropriate orders in accordance with law. 3. It is settled proposition of law that when the petitioner is in settled possession and enjoyment of the property, the respondents are 3 not entitled to interfere with the possession and enjoyment of the subject land of the petitioner and such highhanded action of the respondents would amount to depriving the petitioner 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 this petitioner possession is illegal, still, the petitioner is required to be afforded an opportunity before taking appropriate action and 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, when the petitioner is in settled possession and enjoyment of the property, he cannot be dispossessed, without following due process of law. Therefore, the respondents are directed not to interfere with the peaceful possession and enjoyment of the petitioner’s subject property. However, if they intend to take any action against subject property of the petitioner, they shall follow the due procedure as contemplated under the law. 4. With the above direction, the writ petition is disposed of. No costs. As a sequel miscellaneous application, pending, if any, shall also stand closed. ________________________________ VENKATESWARLU NIMMAGADDA, J 17.07.2025 kkllkk 1 2004 (1) SCC 769 4 247 HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE VENKATESWARLU NIMMAGADDA WRIT PETITION NO: 7650 of 2019 17.07.2025 kkllkk 5