Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Andhra Pradesh · body

2025 DAILYLAW 20738 (AP)

GUDDATI DEEPA v. THE STATE OF AP

WP/14707/2025 · 2025-07-14

Venkateswarlu Nimmagadda

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

APHC010291492025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3329] TUESDAY,THE FIFTEENTH DAY OF JULY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE VENKATESWARLU NIMMAGADDA WRIT PETITION NO: 14707/2025 Between: 1. GUDDATI DEEPA, W/0 GUDDATI SURYAKIRAN, AGED 35 YEARS, R/0 3-78, GONTANAMMA TEMPLE STREET, MYSANNAGUDEM, JANGAREDDYGUDEM MANDAL, ELURU DISTRICT, ANDHRA PRADESH-534447 ...PETITIONER AND 1. THE STATE OF AP, BY ITS PRINCIPLE SECRETARY, PANCHYATHY RAJ AND RURAL DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT, A.P SECRETARIAT OFFICE, VELAGAPUDI, ANNARAVATHI, GUNTUR DIST, ANDHRA PRADESH. 2. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR OF ELURU, ELURU DISTRICT, ANDHRA PRADESH. 3. THE REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER, JANGAREDDYGUDEM, ELURU DISTRICT, ANDHRA PRADESH. 4. THE TAHSILDAR OF JANGAREDDYGUDEM MANDAL, ELURU DISTRICT, ANDHRA PRADESH. 5. THE STATION HOUSE OFFICER, JANGAREDDYGUDEM POLICE STATION, ELURU DISTRICT, ANDHRA PRADESH. 6. THE MYSANNAGUDEM GRAM, PANCHYATHY REP BY ITS SECRETARY, JANGAREDDYGUDEM MANDAL, ELURU DISTRICT, ANDHRA PRADESH. 2 ...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 topleased to issue a Writ Order or direction particularly, one in the nature of writ of Mandamus declaring the action of 4-6 respondent in making efforts to dispossess the petitioner from her land of extent 0.8480 cents in Survey No. 120/2 L.P. No. 870 situated at Mysannagudem, Jangareddygudem Mandal, Eluru District, Andhra Pradesh at the instance of the local politicianswithout following procedure established by the law as illegal, arbitrary and violation of principles of natural justice and the act of authorities is against the principle laid down by the Honble Apex court in the case of RAME GOWDA V/S M VARADAPPA NAIDU Citation 2003 LawSuit(SC) 1248 and consequential direct the respondents not to interfere into the peaceful possession over the petitioners lands extent 0.8480 cents in Survey No. 120/2 L.P. No. 870 situated at Mysannagudem, Jangareddygudem Mandal, Eluru District, Andhra Pradesh except procedure established by the law and to pass IA NO: 1 OF 2025 Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased pleased to direct the respondents not to interfere over the possession of the peaceful possession over the petitioner's lands extent 0.8480 cents in Survey No. 120/2 L.P. No. 870 Mysannagudem, Jangareddygudem Mandal, Eluru District, Andhra Pradesh, except due process of law pending disposal of the above writ petition and to pass Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. NALLANAGULA LALITHA SREE Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. GP FOR PANCHAYAT RAJ RURAL DEV 2. GP FOR HOME 3. GP FOR REVENUE The Court made the following: 3 THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE VENKATESWARLU NIMMAGADDA WRIT PETITION NO: 14707/2025 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 respondent Nos.4 to 6 in making efforts to dispossess the petitioner from her land of extent 0.8480 cents in Survey No.120/2 L.P.No.870 situated at Mysannagudem, Jangareddygudem Mandal, Eluru District, Andhra Pradesh at the instance of the local politicians without following procedure established by the law as illegal, arbitrary and violation of principles of natural justice and the act of authorities is against the principle laid down by the Hon’ble Apex court in the case of RAME GOWDA V/S M VARADAPPA NAIDU Citation: 2003 LawSuit(SC) 1248 and consequential direct the respondents not to interfere into the peaceful possession over the petitioner’s lands extent 0.8480 cents in Survey No.120/2 L.P.No.870 situated at Mysannagudem, Jangareddygudem Mandal, Eluru District, Andhra Pradesh except procedure established by the law 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 interfere with the petitioner’s peaceful possession and enjoyment over the subject property, without following due process of law. 3. Learned Government Pleader for the respondents furnished written instructions dated 18.06.2025 issued by the 4th respondent, wherein it is stated as follows: 4 “I submit that as per RSR of Mysannagudem Village of Jangareddigudem Mandal, the said R.S.No.120/2 holds an extent of Ac.26.03 cents is recorded as Ralla Gutta – Government Poramboke. I further submit that during the year 2023, an extent of ac.0.85 cents covered by R.S.NO.120/2 was assigned to the petitioner herein as per the recommendations of the Assignment Committee and the Gram Panchayat and consequently, the subject land was handed over to the petitioner. I further submit that the name of the petitioner was entered into the online webland adangal for the petition scheduled land vide 1-B Khata No.5004 with LPM No.870. I further submit that the respondent authorities never interfered into the possession of the subject land once handed over to the beneficiary/petitioner herein. No notice/order/direction that may deemed as interference.” 4. Having regard to the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioner and on perusal of the written instructions furnished by the learned Government Pleader for the respondents, it is observed that the respondents are not interfering with the possession and enjoyment of the petitioner over the subject property. It is only the apprehension of the petitioner. Therefore, this Court deems it appropriate to dispose of the Writ Petition directing the respondents, if they intend to interfere with the peaceful 5 possession and enjoyment of the petitioner over the subject property, they shall follow 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 1155..0077..22002255 TTPPSS 6 74 HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE VENKATESWARLU NIMMAGADDA WRIT PETITION NO:14707 of 2025 1155..0077..22002255 TTPPSS