APHC010255082025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3329] THURSDAY ,THE EIGHTH DAY OF MAY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE VENKATESWARLU NIMMAGADDA WRIT PETITION NO: 12705/2025 Between: P.chalapathi, and Others ...PETITIONER(S) AND The State Of Andhra Pradesh and Others ...RESPONDENT(S) Counsel for the Petitioner(S): 1. P V N KIRAN KUMAR Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. GP FOR REVENUE The Court made the following: 2 NV, J W.P.NO.12705 OF 2025 THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE VENKATESWARLU NIMMAGADDA WRIT PETITION NO: 12705/2025 O R D E R: The present writ petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking following relief: “ ... to issue a writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of a writ of mandamus declaring the high handed action of the respondents No.4 and his subordinates in interfering in with our rights over the house plots in an extent of 2½ Cents each in Sy.No.729/2-4 of Sai Baba Nagar, Mamillapalli Village fields, C.K.Dinne Mandal, YSR Kadapa District eventhough the possession certificates which was granted in the year, 2011 are still in subsistence and trying to dispossess us and that too without issuance of any notice due to political pressure as arbitrary, illegal, contrary to the well established legal principles apart from being violative of fundamental and constitutional rights guaranteed us under article Constitution of India and consequently direct the respondent Nos 4 and his 14 19.21 and 300-A of the subordinates not to interfere with our rights over the house plots in an extent of 2 ½ Cents each in Sy.No.729/2-4 of Sai Baba Nagar, Mamillapalli Village fields, C.K.Dinne Mandal, YSR Kadapa District and pass...”(in verbatim) 2. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned Government Pleader for Revenue for the respondents. 3. 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 interfere the petitioners from their respective property without following due process of law. 4. Learned Government Pleader for Revenue submits that, if the petitioners are in possession of the subject property, the respondents would follow due process of law and requested to pass appropriate orders. 5. When the petitioners are in settled possession and enjoyment of the property, the petitioners cannot be dispossessed, without following due 3 NV, J W.P.NO.12705 OF 2025 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 petitioners are in possession of the subject property, the respondents are directed not to interfere the petitioners from the subject property, except by due process of law. 6. With the above direction, the writ petition is disposed of at the stage of admission with the consent of both the counsel. No costs. Consequently, miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shall also stand closed. _____________________________________ JUSTICE VENKATESWARLU NIMMAGADDA Date:08.05.2025 LSP 1 2004 (1) SCC 769 4 NV, J W.P.NO.12705 OF 2025 100 THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE VENKATESWARLU NIMMAGADDA WRIT PETITION NO: 12705/2025 Date:08.05.2025 LSP