APHC010234612025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3329] WEDNESDAY ,THE SEVENTH DAY OF MAY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE VENKATESWARLU NIMMAGADDA WRIT PETITION NO: 12152/2025 Between: B.jayaramudu, ...PETITIONER AND The State Of A P and Others ...RESPONDENT(S) Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. N PREMRAJ Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. VENKATA RAMA RAO KOTA SC FOR APSPDCL 2. GP FOR REVENUE The Court made the following: THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE VENKATESWARLU NIMMAGADDA WRIT PETITION NO:12152/2025 O R D E R: This writ petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking following relief: “to issue appropriate writ or order or direction more particularly one in the nature of writ of mandamus declaring the action of the respondents without any prior notice and without acquiring the land under the Land Acquisition Act in proceeding with the construction of Sub- Station to the APSPDCL an extent of Ac.0.30 cents in the petitioner lands situated in Sy.No.116-3 an extent of Ac.5.47 cents, an extent of Ac.5.00 cents in Sy.No.116-4 and an extent of Ac.0.90 cents in Sy.No.116-5 of A.Narayanapuram Village of Anantapuramu Mandal, Anantapuramu District is illegal, arbitrary and in violation of Principles of Natural justice and in violation of Art 14, and 300-A of the Constitution of India and consequently direct the respondents not to interfere in to the petitioner peaceful possession of land and not to proceed with the construction of Sub-Station to the APSPDCL an extent of Ac.0.30 cents the interest of justice and to pass such other order or orders…” 2. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Government Pleader for Revenue 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. On the other hand, learned Government Pleader appearing for the respondents furnished written instructions, wherein, the operative portion of the said instructions is extracted hereunder: “Further, it is submitted that, as verified from this office records, the land in Sy.No.116-5 extent Ac.0.90 cents of A.Narayanapuram Village of Ananthapuramu Urban Mandal has not been assigned to anybody and mentioned as Government land in revenue records. The present petitioner has got no right over the above said land. Moreover, the petitioner is not a land less poor person as he has already having an extent of Ac.10.47 cents of land as detailed above. As per the instructions received from the District Administration, the above land in Sy.No.116-5 extent Ac.0.90 cents of Government land has been identified for establishment of Electric Sub-station. But, so far no proposals for alienation of the above land submitted from this office. If alienation proposal required on the said land, action will be taken only following the due procedure of law.” 5. Having regard to the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Government Pleader for the respondents and on perusal of the written instructions submitted by the respondents, it is observed that so far there are no proposals for alienation of the subject land and if any alienation is required in respect of the said land, action will be taken only following due procedure of law. It is also settled proposition of law that, when the petitioner is in settled possession and enjoyment of their respective 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, with the consent of both the counsel. No costs. Consequently, miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shall also stand closed. _____________________________________ JUSTICE VENKATESWARLU NIMMAGADDA Date:07.05.2025 BSP 1 2004 (1) SCC 769 71 THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE VENKATESWARLU NIMMAGADDA WRIT PETITION NO:12152/2025 Date:07.05.2025 BSP