Ungarala Narayana Murthy, v. State of Andhra Pradesh,
WP/15929/2020 · 2025-09-16
Venkateswarlu Nimmagadda
body2025
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 17702 (AP) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 17702 (AP) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
::1::
APHC010242322020
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3329] WEDNESDAY,THE SEVENTEENTH DAY OF SEPTEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE VENKATESWARLU NIMMAGADDA WRIT PETITION NO: 15929/2020 Between:
1. UNGARALA NARAYANA MURTHY,, W/O. UNGARALA CHAKRADHARA RAO, AGED 46 YEARS, R/O. D.NO.9-81, GAJJALAMMA GUDI VEEDHI, TATIPARTHI, GOLLAPROLU MANDAL, EAST GODAVARI DISTRICT.
2. UNGARALA ARJUN,, W/O. UNGARALA PULLA RAO, AGED 49 YEARS, R/O. D.NO.9-69, GAJJALAMMA GUDI VEEDHI, TATIPARTHI, GOLLAPROLU MANDAL, EAST GODAVARI DISTRICT.
...PETITIONER(S) AND
1. STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY,
PANCHAYAT RAJ DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT, VELAGAPUDI, GUNTUR DISTRICT.
2. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, EAST GODAVARI DISTRICT AT KAKINADA.
3. THE DISTRICT PANCHAYAT OFFICER, EAST GODAVARI DISTRICT AT KAKINADA
4. TATIPARTHI GRAMPANCHAYAT, GOLLAPROLU MANDAL,
::2::
EAST GODAVARI DISTRICT, REP. BY ITS SECRETARY
...RESPONDENT(S): Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased to issue an appropriate order, writ or direction more particularly one in the nature of writ of mandamus declaring the action of the respondents in contemplating to dispossess the petitioners from the shops hearing electricity service connection Nos. 14525230712 002398 and 14525230712 001224, situated in gramakanatham land near water tank in Tatiparthi village, Gollaprolu mandal, East Godavari District, without following due process of law, as illegal, arbitrary, discriminatory, contrary to law besides violative of Articles 14, 19 and 300A of the Constitution of India, and consequently direct the respondents to follow due process of law in case the said shops bearing electricity service connection Nos. 14525230712 002398 and 14525230712 001224 respectively, situated in gramakanatham land near water tank in Tatiparthi village, Gollaprolu mandal, East Godavari District are required for any public purpose, on par with the occupants of the other shops, in the interest of justice and pass Counsel for the Petitioner(S):
1. E V V S RAVI KUMAR Counsel for the Respondent(S):
1. GP FOR REVENUE
2. GP FOR PANCHAYAT RAJ RURAL DEV
3. N SRIHARI (Standing Counsel for ZPP MPP and GRAM PANCHAYAT)
::3::
THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE VENAKTESWARLU NIMMAGADDA WRIT PETITION No.15929 of 2020 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 an appropriate order, writ or direction more particularly one in the nature of writ of mandamus declaring the action of the respondents in contemplating to dispossess the petitioners from the shops bearing electricity service connection Nos.14525230712 002398 and 14525230712 001224, situated in Gramakantham land near water tank in Tatiparthi village, Gollaprolu Mandal, East Godavari District, without following due process of law, as illegal, arbitrary, discriminatory, contrary to law besides violative of Articles 14, 19 and 300A of the Constitution of India, and consequently direct the respondents to follow due process of law in case the said shops bearing electricity service connection Nos.14525230712 002398 and 14525230712 001224 respectively, situated in gramakantham land near water tank in Tatiparthi Village, Gollaprolu Mandal, East Godavari District are required for any public purpose, on par with the occupants of the other shops, in respect of justice 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 petitioners from their land, without following due process of law.
3. Learned Assistant Government Pleader for Respondents, admitted that the petitioners are in continuous possession of subject
::4::
land and the respondents authorities would follow due process of law and requested to pass appropriate orders.
4.
Learned counsel for the Petitioners submits that the petitioners the 1st petitioner and 2nd petitioner are carrying on business in the shops situated in Tatiparthi Village, Gollaprolu Mandal, East Godavari District for the last 20 years. He further submits that the electricity bills and photographs shows petitioners’ possession over their respective shops, and the same substantiated petitioners’ possession over the subject respective shops.
5. While things stood thus, official Respondent No.4 – Grampanchayat tried to dispossess the petitioners from their respective shops on the ground that the said shops are required for the purpose of constructing a Rythu Bharosa Kendram. Aggrieved by the action of the Respondents, the present Writ Petition is being filed.
6. 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 petitioners’ constitutional right guaranteed
::5::
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 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 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.
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
17.09.2025 krk
1 2004 (1) SCC 769
::6::
THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE VENAKTESWARLU NIMMAGADDA
WRIT PETITION NO.15929 of 2020
17.09.2025 krk
117