APHC010321002025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) FRIDAY, THE FOURTH DAY OF JULY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE VENKATESWARLU NIMMAGADDA WRIT PETITION NO: 16248 OF 2025 Between: Jagadabi Surendra Raju, S/o. Late J.Muniraju Age about 55 years, Occ: Cultivation, R/o. Nariganipallie Village, H/o. Nariganipallie Post, Ramasamudram Mandal, Annamayya District, A.P. ...Petitioner AND 1. The State of Andhra Pradesh, Rep by its Principal Secretary, Revenue Department, Secretariat Building, Velagapudi Village, Amaravathi Mandal, Guntur District, 2. The District Collector, Annamayya, Annamayya District. 3. The Tahsildar, Ramasamudram Mandal, Annamayya District. 4. The Sub Inspector of Police, Ramasamudram Police Station, Annamayya District. ...Respondents 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 to issue an order, direction or writ, more particularly one in the nature of writ of Mandamus, declaring the action of respondent in trying to interfere and dispossess the petitioner from the land an extent of Ac 1.75 cents situated in Sy No 218/IB in Nariganipallie Village, Ramasamudram Mandal Annamayya District, without following due process of law as illegal, arbitrary and violative of 14. 21 and 300A of the constitution of India and consequently direct the respondent not to interfere and dispossess the petitioner from the subject land. lA NO: 1 OF 2025 Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the writ petition, the High Court may be pleased to direct the respondent not to interfere dispossess the petitioner 1.75cents situated in Sy No 218/IB in from the land an extent of Ac Nariganipallie Village, Ramasamudram Mandal Annamayya District without following the due process of law. Pending disposal of the writ petition. Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI M. VENKATA RAMANA REDDY Counsel for the Respondent Nos.1 to 3 :GP FOR REVENUE Counsel for the Respondent No.4 : GP FOR HOME The Court made the following order: ..1.. • • X • • APHC010321002025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) FRIDAY,THE FOURTH DAY OF JULY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE VENKATESWARLU NIMMAGADDA WRIT PETITION NO: 16248/2025 [3329] Between: 1.JAGADABI SURENDRA RAJU, S/O LATE J.MUNIRAJU AGE ABOUT 55 YEARS, OCC- CULTIVATION, R/0 NARIGANIPALLIE VILLAGE, H/0 NARIGANIPALLIE POST, RAMASAMUDRAM MANDAL, ANNAMAYYA DISTRICT, A.P. ...PETITIONER AND 1.THE STATE OF AP, REP BY ITS PRINCIPAL DEPARTMENT, VELAGAPUDI SECRETARY, SECRETARIAT BUILDING, VILLAGE, AMARAVATHI MANDAL, GUNTUR DISTRICT, 2. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, ANNAMAYYA, ANNAMAYYA DISTRICT. REVENUE 3.THE TAHSILDAR, RAMASAMUDRAM MANDAL, ANNAMAYYA DISTRICT. SUBINSPECTOR OF POLICE, POLICE STATION, 4.THE RAMASAMUDRAM ANNAMAYYA DISTRICT. ...RESPONDENT(S): 2 The Court made the foHowinq ORDER: 1. This writ petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking the following relief; ‘to issue an order, direction or writ, more particularly one in the nature of writ of Mandamus, declaring the action of respondent in trying to interfere and dispossess the petitioner from the land an extent of Ac 1.75 cents situated in Sy No 218/IB in Nariganipallie Village, Annamayya District, without following due process of law as illegal, arbitrary and violative of 14,21 and 300A of the constitution of India and consequently direct the 3rd respondent not to interfere and dispossess the petitioner from the subject land, and pass Ramasamudram Mandal 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 the petitioner from his subject property, without following due process of law. 3. The learned Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue appearing for the respondents furnished written instructions issued by the 3'"' respondent dated 03.07.2025, wherein it is stated as follows:- “In this connection, it it is submitted that the Writ Petitioner stated that, they got right over the schedule land in Sy. No. 218/1B to an extent of Ac. 1-75 Cents of Miniki Village, Ramasamudram '7^ Mandal by way of inheritance of D-Form Patta granted infavour of Smt J. Parvathamma W/o Muniraju i.e. Writ Petitioner's Mother vide. A.M. No. 58/4/1407. Perhaps, as seen from the DKT Register; the said iand in Sy. No. 218/1 with an extent of Ac. 1-75 Cents which was said to be granted D Form Patta was not entered in favour of Smt J. Parvathamma W/o Muniraju. Hence, it was clearly evident that the DKT Patta which was said to be assigned in favour of Smt J. Parvathamma W/o Muniraju i.e. Writ Petitioner's Mother vide. A.M. No. 58/4/1407 is fabricated; bogus and created only for misleading the Hon'ble High Court of Andhra Pradesh, Amaravathi”. It is settled proposition of law that when the petitioner is in settled possession and enjoyment of the property, the respondents are not entitled to interfere with the possession and enjoyment of the petitioner and such highhanded action of the respondents would amount to depriving the petitioner’s constitutional right guaranteed under Article 300-A of the Constitution of India, besides violation of Article 14 of the 4. Constitution of India. Even assuming for a moment that this petitioner’s possession is illegal, still, the petitioner is required to be afforded an opportunity before taking appropriate action and in view of the law declared by the Apex Court in ‘Rame Gowda 4 (dead) by LRs. v. M.Varadappa Naidu (Dead) by L.Rs.\ when the petitioner is in settled possession and enjoyment of the property, he cannot be dispossessed, without following due process of law. Therefore, the respondents are directed not to interfere with the peaceful possession and enjoyment of the petitioner’s subject property. However, if they intend to take any action against subject property of the petitioner, they shall follow the due procedure as contemplated under the law. With the above direction, the writ petition is disposed of. No 5. costs. As a sequel, interlocutory applications if any pending. shall stand closed. T 2004(1) see 769 Sd/- K. TATA RAO DEPUTY REGISTRAR //TRUE COPY// SECTION OFFICER To. 1. The Principal Secretary, Revenue Department, State of Andhra Pradesh, Secretariat Building, Velagapudi Village, Amaravathi Mandal, Guntur District, 2. The District Collector, Annamayya, Annamayya District. 3. The Tahsildar, Ramasamudram Mandal, Annamayya District. 4. The Sub Inspector of Police, Ramasamudram Police Station, Annamayya District. 5. One CC to Sri M. Venkata Ramana Reddy, Advocate [OPUC] 6. Two CCs to GP for Home, High Court of Andhra Pradesh [OUT] 7. Two CCs to GP for Revenue, High Court of Andhra Pradesh [OUT] 8. Two CD Copies W| HIGH COURT DATED:04/07/2025 ORDER WP NO. 16248 OF 2025 0 2 AUG 2025 ' if -*4«inTent Sectionx^ m ■ «>»' DISPOSING OF THE W.P. WITHOUT COSTS