::1:: APHC010250992025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3329] THURSDAY ,THE TWENTY SIXTH DAY OF JUNE TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE VENKATESWARLU NIMMAGADDA WRIT PETITION NO: 15265/2025 Between: D Venkata Lakshmi 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 The 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 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 11, 12, 13, 17, 18, 19, 20, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 36, 41, 42, 44, 46, 47, 48, 51, 55, 56, 57, 59, 60, 61, 62, 63, 64, 65, 66, 67, 68, 69, 70, 71, 72, 73, 74, 76, 77, 78, 80 respectively admeasuring an extent of 1 1/2 Cents in Survey Number 43-6 situated at Rachanapalli Village, Anantapur 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 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 11, 12, 13, 17, 18, 19, 20, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 2 36, 41, 42, 44, 46, 47, 48, 51, 55, 56, 57, 59, 60, 61, 62, 63, 64, 65, 66, 67, 68, 69, 70, 71, 72, 73, 74, 76, 77, 78, 80 respectively admeasuring an extent of 1 14 Cents in Survey Number 43-6 situated at Rachanapalli Village, Anantapur Rural Mandal, Anantapur District without following due process of law and pass order” 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 subject property, without following due process of law. 3. The learned Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue appearing for the respondents furnished written instructions issued by the 4th respondent dated 06.05.2025, wherein it is stated as follows:- “Further it is submitted that, as could be verified from the house site grant register of Rachanapalli Village, Ananthapuramu Rural Mandal it is noticed that no possession certificates have been issued in favour of G.Venkata Lakshmi and 41 others for Plot No. 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6,11, 12, 13, 17, 18, 19, 20, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 36, 41, 42, 44, 46, 47, 48, 51, 55, 56, 57, 59, 60, 61, 62, 63, 64, 65, 66, 67, 68, 69, 70, 71, 72, 73, 74, 76, 77, 78, 80 vide H.S.Dls.No.853/18 Dt.20.06.2018. Moreover, the petitioners are trying to encroach vanka land of Rachanapalli Village. No layout formed by the Government 3 and no possession certificates issued to the petitioners by this office. The possession certificates enclosed to the affidavit are not Issued by this office”. 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 petitioners’ 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 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 interfere with the peaceful possession and enjoyment of the petitioners’ subject property. However, if they intend to take any action against subject property of the petitioners, they shall follow the due procedure as contemplated under the law. 1 2004 (1) SCC 769 4 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 26.06.2025 klk 5 106 THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE VENAKTESWARLU NIMMAGADDA WRIT PETITION NO.15265 of 2025 26.06.2025 klk