::1:: APHC010241942025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3329] WEDNESDAY ,THE EIGHTEENTH DAY OF JUNE TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE VENKATESWARLU NIMMAGADDA WRIT PETITION NO: 12893/2025 Between: T Chandra and Others ...PETITIONER(S) AND The State Of Andhra Pradesh and Others ...RESPONDENT(S) Counsel for the Petitioner(S): 1. N CHANDRA SEKHAR REDDY Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. GP FOR REVENUE 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 nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action on the part of Officials of Respondents 4 and 5 in issuing directions to Petitioners to vacate from their respective Housing Plots bearing respective Plot Numbers 429, 425, 428, 433, 426, 424, 430, 427, 434, 432 respectively admeasuring an extent of 20 X 30 feet in Survey Numbers 83-4, 83-11, 83-12 situated at Kumgunta Village nantapur Rural Mandal, Anantapur District as illegal, arbitrary, against principles of natural justice and consequently direct the Respondents 2 to 5 to not to dispossess the Petitioners from their Housing Plots bearing respective Plot Numbers 429, 425, 428, 433, 426, 424, 430, 427, 434, 432 respectively admeasuring an extent of 20 X 30 feet in Survey Numbers 83-4, 83-11, 83-12 situated at Kurugunta Village, Anantapur Rural Mandal, Anantapur District without following due process of law and to pass such 2 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 petitioners from their lands, without following due process of law. 3. Learned Assistant Government Pleader for Respondents, admitted that the petitioners are 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. 4. It is settled proposition of law that 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 violating 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 petitioners’ possession is illegal, still, the petitioners are 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 3 Naidu (Dead) by L.Rs.1, when the petitioners are in settled possession and 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, and subject to verification of possession and the genuineness of the possession certificates annexed to the writ petition. 5. With the above direction, the writ petition is disposed of. No costs. As a sequel, interlocutory applications if any pending, shall stand closed. _____________________________________ JUSTICE VENKATESWARLU NIMMAGADDA 18.06.2025 klk 1 2004 (1) SCC 769 4 48 THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE VENAKTESWARLU NIMMAGADDA WRIT PETITION NO.12893 of 2025 18.06.2025 klk