APHC010372732025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3331] MONDAY, THE TWENTY EIGHTH DAY OF JULY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE SUBBA REDDY SATTI WRIT PETITION NO: 19077/2025 Between: 1. NAMMI NARASIMHULU, S/O NAMMI (LATE) BANGARI, AGED ABOUT 80 YEARS, R/O DOOR.NO.24-127, BOTTAVANIPALEM,MADHURAWADA, VISAKHAPATNAM DISTRICT - 530052 ...PETITIONER AND 1. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP.BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, REVENUE DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT BUILDINGS, VELAGAPUDI, AMARAVATHI, GUNTUR DISTRICT. 2. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, VISAKHAPATNAM, DISTRICT AT VISAKHAPATNAM. 3. THE TAHSILDAR, VISAKHAPATNAM RURALMANDAL VISAKHAPATNAM 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 issue a Writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus, declaring the action of the 3rd respondent in interfering with the peaceful possession and enjoyment of the Petitioner s land in Sy.No.29/2 measuring an extent of Ac.1.05 Cents situated at Madhurawada Village, Visakhapatnam Rural Mandal, Visakhapatnam District, and trying to dispossess the Petitioner from the said land without SRS,J W.P.No.19625 of 2025 notice or due process of law, as illegal, arbitrary, unjust, and contrary to the Fundamental Rights enshrined under the Constitution of India, and direct the 3rd Respondent not to interfere with the peaceful possession of the petitioner s property without following due process of law, and 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 may be pleased to direct the respondents not to interfere with the peaceful possession and enjoyment of the Petitioner’s land in Sy.No.29/2 measuring an extent of Ac.1.05 Cents situated at Madhurawada Village, Visakhapatnam Rural Mandal, Visakhapatnam District, except by following due process of law pending disposal of the above Writ Petition, and pass Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. GUMMA ITIHAAS Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. GP FOR REVENUE The Court made the following: ::ORDER:: Heard Sri Itihaas Gumma, learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue, for respondents 1 to 3. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the then Tahsildar issued a D-form patta vide D.R.No.171/1380/B2 dated 28.01.1970 assigning Ac.1-05 cents in survey No.29/2, situated at Madhurawada village, in favour of the petitioner and the petitioner has been in possession and enjoyment of the property. The Mandal Revenue officer and the Tahsildar, Visakhapatnam (Rural) issued possession certificates vide L.Dis.No.41/2003Hc dated 20.01.2003 and SR No.221/2017A dated 25.04.2017, respectively. He would submit that respondent No.3, without issuing any notice, is trying to dispossess the petitioner. SRS,J W.P.No.19625 of 2025 3. Learned Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue submitted the instructions of Tahsildar, Visakhapatnam Rural and contended that the land of an extent of Ac.4-00, in survey No.29/2 of Madhurawada village was assigned in favour of one Yellapragada Sankuntala, W/o Ratna Rao vide D-Form Patta DR No.12/84 Spl & 8A R.Dis.11/75 dated 08.07.1966 under ‘landless poor’ category. The original assignee, in turn, sold the land to one Danthuluri Sanyasi Suryanarayana Gajapathi Raju, S/o late Narayana Raju, through a registered sale deed bearing document No.10695/1985 dated 30.09.1985. Learned Assistant Government Pleader would submit that due to the violation of the condition, the proceedings under Section 3 of the Andhra Pradesh Assigned Lands (Prohibition of Transfers) Act, 1977, were initiated, and the land was resumed. No assignment was made in favour of the petitioner. He would also submit that the Tahsildar is not interfering with the subject land. 4. This Court, in judicial review under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, will not declare the title. This Court is also not recording any finding as to the possession of the petitioner over the property. The instructions of the Tahsildar are clear that the Tahsildar is not interfering with the subject property. 5. Given the instructions furnished by the Tahsildar, this writ petition is disposed of at the admission stage with the consent of learned counsel on either side directing respondent No.3 not to interfere with the subject property, without following due process of law. No costs. As a sequel, pending miscellaneous petitions, if any, shall stand closed. ___________________________ JUSTICE SUBBA REDDY SATTI Date: 28.07.2025 ikn SRS,J W.P.No.19625 of 2025 189 THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE SUBBA REDDY SATTI WRIT PETITION NO: 19077 of 2025 Date: 28.07.2025 IKN