APHC010294142025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3329] TUESDAY ,THE TWENTY FOURTH DAY OF JUNE TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE VENKATESWARLU NIMMAGADDA WRIT PETITION NO: 14882/2025 Between: Sure Chenchaiah, ...PETITIONER AND The State Of Andhra Pradesh and Others ...RESPONDENT(S) Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. TURAGA SAI SURYA Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. GP FOR REVENUE The Court made the following: THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE VENKATESWARLU NIMMAGADDA WRIT PETITION NO: 14882/2025 O R D E R: 1. This writ petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India to issue a Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the 4th respondent in interfering with petitioner’s possession over the land to an extent of 4.84 cents in RS.No.315/2 situated in Thaticherla Village, Komarole Mandal, Prakasam District, without following the due process of law is highly illegal, arbitrary, unjust and violative of Principles of Natural Justice and also violation of Article 14, 21 and 300 A of the Constitution of India and consequently, direct the respondents not to interfere with his possession over the said land. 2. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Government Pleader for Revenue for the respondents. 3. During hearing, learned counsel for the petitioner, without touching the merits of the case, requested this Court to issue a direction to the respondent authorities not to interfere with the peaceful possession and enjoyment of the subject property of the petitioner without following due process of law. 4. Learned Government Pleader for Revenue submits that, if the petitioner is in possession of the subject property, the respondents would follow due process of law and requested to pass appropriate orders. 5. When the petitioner is in settled possession and enjoyment of the property, the petitioner 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 interfere with the peaceful possession and enjoyment of the subject property of the petitioner, 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:24.06.2025 BSP 12004 (1) SCC 769 6 THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE VENKATESWARLU NIMMAGADDA WRIT PETITION NO:14882/2025 Date:24.06.2025 BSP