APHC010253172025 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: 12628/2025 Between: G Mallikarjuna ...PETITIONER AND The State Of Andhra Pradesh and Others ...RESPONDENT(S) Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. V VINOD K REDDY Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. GP FOR REVENUE The Court made the following: 2 THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE VENKATESWARLU NIMMAGADDA WRIT PETITION NO: 12628/2025 ORDER: This writ petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of the India seeking the following reliefs:- “to issue a writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of respondents in trying to dispossess the petitioner from the land admeasuring an extent of Ac.3.30 cents in Sy.No.207/2 of Katrayapadu Village, Dagadarthi Mandal, SPSR Nellore District without issuing any notice, without following the due process of law as illegal, arbitrary, violative of Principles of Natural Justice, Articles 21 and 300-A of the Constitution of India and consequently direct the respondents herein not to dispossess the petitioner from the land admeasuring an extent of Ac.3.30 cents in Sy.No.207/2 of Katrayapadu Village, Dagadarthi Mandal, SPSR Nellore District and pass such other order.” 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 the subject property without following due process of law. 3. Learned Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue submits that, if the petitioner is in possession of the subject property, the respondents would follow due process of law. 4. Having regard to the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Assistant Government Pleader for the respondents, it is observed that when the petitioner is in settled 3 possession and enjoyment of the subject property, he 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 dispossess the petitioner from the subject property, except by following due process of law. 5. With the above direction, the writ petition is disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs. As a sequel miscellaneous application, pending, if any, shall also stand closed. ________________________________ VENKATESWARLU NIMMAGADDA, J 0077..0055..22002255 TTPPSS 1 2004 (1) SCC 769 4 187 HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE VENKATESWARLU NIMMAGADDA WRIT PETITION NO:12628 of 2025 0077..0055..22002255 TTPPSS