APHC010296242025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3329] FRIDAY ,THE TWENTIETH DAY OF JUNE TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE VENKATESWARLU NIMMAGADDA WRIT PETITION NO: 14634/2025 Between: S Bhaskar Reddy ...PETITIONER AND The State Of Andhra Pradesh and Others ...RESPONDENT(S) Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. P HEMACHANDRA 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: 14634/2025 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 the respondents more particularly respondent Nos.2 and 3 in trying to dispossess the petitioner from the agriculture land in an extent of Ac.0.21 cents situated in Survey No.98/15/A in Adusupashem Village, Renigunta Mandal, Tirupatlii District without due process of law or provisions of Land Acquisition Act as being illegal, ultravirus and violative to Articles 14, 19 and 21 of the Constitution of India; consequently direct the respondents not to dispossess or interfere with petitioner’s peaceful possession of agriculture land in an extent of Ac.0.21 cents situated in Survey No.98/15/A in Adusupashem Village, Renigunta Mandal, Tirupatlii District without due process of 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 dispossess and not to interfere with the petitioner’s 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. 3 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 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 and not to interfere with the petitioner’s 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 1199..0066..22002255 TTPPSS 1 2004 (1) SCC 769 4 55 HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE VENKATESWARLU NIMMAGADDA WRIT PETITION NO:14634 of 2025 1199..0066..22002255 TTPPSS 5