APHC010313242025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3329] THURSDAY,THE TWENTY SIXTH DAY OF JUNE TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE VENKATESWARLU NIMMAGADDA WRIT PETITION NO: 15606/2025 Between: 1. BONTHA VISWANDHA REDDY, S/O. BONTHA NARAYANAREDDY, AGED ABOUT 47 YEARS, OCC AGRICULTURE, R/O. THIPPANAPALLE VILLAGE BADVEL MANDAL,YSR KADAPA DISTRICT ...PETITIONER AND 1. STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, REVENUE DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT, VELAGAPUDI, AMARAVATI, GUNTUR DISTRICT. 2. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, YSR KADAPA DISTRICT. 3. THE TAHSILDAR, BADVEL MANDAL, YSR KADAPA DISTRICT. 4. THE VILLAGE REVENUE OFFICER, THIPPANAPALLI GRAM PANCHAYAT, BADVEL MANDAL, YSR KADAPA DISTRICT. ...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 tomay be pleased to direct the Respondents not to interfere with my peaceful possession and enjoyment of agricultural land admeasuring Ac. 1.600 cents in Sy.No.128-2 situated at Thippanapalle Village, Badvel Mandal, YSR Kadapa District pending disposal of the Writ Petition and pass such 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 may be pleased to direct the Respondents not to interfere with my peaceful possession and enjoyment of agricultural land admeasuring Ac. 1.600 cents in Sy.No.128-2 situated at Thippanapalle Village, Badvel Mandal, YSR Kadapa District pending disposal of the Writ Petition and pass such Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. M SIVA KUMAR Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. GP FOR REVENUE The Court made the following: THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE VENKATESWARLU NIMMAGADDA WRIT PETITION NO: 15606/2025 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 respondents in trying to dispossess the petitioner from the agricultural land admeasuring Ac.1.600 cents in Sy.No.128-2 situated at Thippanapalle Village, Badvel Mandal, YSR Kadapa District without following due process of law as illegal and arbitrary; consequently, direct the respondents not to interfere with the peaceful possession and enjoyment of the subject property of the petitioner without following due process of law. 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 respondents not to interfere with the peaceful possession and enjoyment of the subject property of the petitioner without following due process of law. 4. On the other hand, learned Government Pleader for Revenue submitted the written instructions issued by the Tahsildar/ respondent No.3, wherein the relevant portion of the said instructions is extracted hereunder: “As per 22A Register the subject land in Sy.No.128/2 an extent Ac.1.60 cents was entered in the name of Gangasani Thulashamma. As per Manual Adangal Fasli 1423 the subject land in Sy.No.18/2 an extent of Ac.1.60 cents was entered in the name of Gangasani Thulashamma. As per Manual 1B the subject land in Sy.No.128/2 an extent of Ac.1.60 cents was entered in the name of Gangasani Thulashamma vide Khatha No.370. As per Webland Adangal the subject land in Sy.No.128/2 an extent of Ac.1.60 cents was entered in the name of Bontha Viswanath Reddy, S/o.Narayana Reddy. Hence attracts POT Act. At preset the subject land is vacant. “ 5. On perusal of the said instructions, it is evident that as per the Web land adangal the subject land belongs to the petitioner and if at all, the respondents intend to interfere with the peaceful possession and enjoyment of the subject land of the petitioner, they would follow due process of law. 6. It is settled proposition of law that, when the petitioners are in settled possession and enjoyment of the subject property, the petitioners cannot be dispossessed, without following due process of law in view of the law declared by the Apex Court in “RameGowda (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. 7. With the above direction, the writ petition is disposed of at the stage of admission with the consent of both the counsel. No costs. 12004 (1) SCC 769 Consequently, miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shall also stand closed. _____________________________________ JUSTICE VENKATESWARLU NIMMAGADDA Date:26.06.2025 BSP 195 THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE VENKATESWARLU NIMMAGADDA WRIT PETITION NO:15606/2025 Date:26.06.2025 BSP