::1:: APHC010191552025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3329] THURSDAY ,THE TENTH DAY OF APRIL TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE VENKATESWARLU NIMMAGADDA WRIT PETITION NO: 9676/2025 Between: Alluri Jyothi ...PETITIONER AND The State Of Andhra Pradesh and Others ...RESPONDENT(S) Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. S DILIP JAYA RAM Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. GP FOR REVENUE 2 THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE VENAKTESWARLU NIMMAGADDA WRIT PETITION No.9676 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 of mandamus or any other appropriate Writ, Order or direction declaring the action of the 4th Respondent and his staff in trying to dispossess the petitioner from the land admeasuring and extent of Ac.0.04 cents in Sy.No.80 of Gangulavari Cheruvu Palle Village, Udayagiri Mandal, SPSR Nellore District, by threatening to demolish petitioner’s house situated therein without issuing any notice as arbitrarily, illegal, unjust, unreasonable, unconstitutional, without authority, against the principles of natural justice and consequently direct the Respondents not to demolish petitioner’s house in furtherance of dispossessing petitioner from the aforementioned land and pass...” 2. 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 her property, without following due process of law. 3. Learned Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue, admitted that the petitioner is continuing in the possession of 3 subject property and the respondents authorities would follow due process of law and requested to pass appropriate orders. 4. Learned counsel for the Petitioner submits that the land admeasuring Ac.0.04 cents in Sy.No.80 of Gangulavari Cheruvu Palle Village, Udayagiri Mandal, SPSR Nellore District is originally belongs to Government, but for time immemorial petitioner’s family members are in physical possession and enjoyment of the same from the past four decades approximately by constructing a thatched hut on one side of the aforementioned extent and the remaining land is being used for making clay articles along with other ancillary purposes. Petitioner made an application for allotment of house sites in the subject land. The 4th respondent having conducted an enquiry and being satisfied, the petitioner was issued with a certificate of possession over a residential site vide patta No. PNLR00570940, dated 21.01.2021 for an extent of Ac. 0.01½ cents. Thereafter, petitioner with the assistance of her family members have got constructed a room with iron sheets roofing and further the petitioner’s possession over the remaining extent of site was not disturbed. Petitioner also constructed a compound wall with iron sheets for the total extent of Ac.0.04 cents. 4 5. While things stood thus, when on 07.04.2025 the 4th respondent along with his staff and machinery approached the premises and directed the petitioner to evict the house immediately, with great resistance the staff and machinery left. But again on 08.04.2025 the 4th respondent along with his staff have approached petitioner’s house and directed to vacate and when questioned about their action they informed the petitioner that petitioner’s house is constructed in Government land. On 09.04.2025 some persons alleging that they were directed by the 4th respondent to level the land and dug holes, despite of petitioner’s resistance petitioner could not stop the same, accordingly petitioner approached the office of the 4th respondent and requested to stop the work, if not, petitioner’s livelihood will be at stake, but without heeding to petitioner’s words respondents directed the petitioner to vacate the house in five days, if not they shall vacate the petitioner forcibly and demolish petitioner’s house by dispossessing petitioner from the subject land. Hence the Writ Petition. 6. Hence the Writ Petition. 6. It is settled proposition of law that when the petitioner is in settled possession and enjoyment of the property, the respondents are not entitled to interfere with the possession and enjoyment of the petitioner and such highhanded action of the respondents would 5 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 this petitioner’s 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, she cannot be dispossessed, without following due process of law. Therefore, the respondents are directed not to dispossess the petitioner from her property, except by due process of law. 7. With the above direction, the writ petition is disposed of, with the consent of both the counsel. No costs. As a sequel, interlocutory applications if any pending, shall stand closed. _____________________________________ JUSTICE VENKATESWARLU NIMMAGADDA 10.04.2025 krk 1 2004 (1) SCC 769 6 THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE VENAKTESWARLU NIMMAGADDA 154 WRIT PETITION No.9676 of 2025 10.04.2025 krk