APHC010379192025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3329] THURSDAY,THE TWENTY FOURTH DAY OF JULY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE VENKATESWARLU NIMMAGADDA WRIT PETITION NO: 19169/2025 Between: 1. JUTTIGA PEDDIRAJU, S/O. LATE NARASIMHA MURTHY, AGED ABOUT 68 YEARS, R/O D.NO.4-43, CHINTAPALLI VARI STREET, RAYAKUDURU VILLAGE, VEERAVASARAM MANDAL, WEST GODAVARI DISTRICT. 2. JUTTIGA VENKATA SREENIVAS, S/O. LATE NARASIMHA MURTHY, AGED 49 YEARS, R/O. D.NO.4-43 CHINTAPALLI VARI STREET, RAYAKUDURU VILLAGE, VEERAVASARAM MANDAL, WEST GODAVARI DISTRICT. ...PETITIONER(S) AND 1. THE STATE OF AP, REP BY IT'S PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, PANCHAYATI RAJ AND RURAL DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT, SECREATRIATE, VELAGAPUDI, AMARAVATI, GUNTUR DISTRICT. 2. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, (PANCHAYAT WING) WEST GODAVARI DISTRICT, BHIMAVARAM. 3. THE ASSISTANT EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, IRRIGATION SECTION, PENUMANTRA VILLAGE AND MANDAL, WEST GODAVARI DISTRICT. 4. THE TAHSILDAR, VEERAVASARAM MANDAL, WEST GODAVARI DISTRICT. 5. RAYAKUDURU GRAMA PANCHAYAT, REP BY IT'S SECRETERY, RAYAKUDURU VILLAGE, VEERAVARASARAM MANDAL, WEST 2 GODAVARI 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 topleased to issue order direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of MANDAMUS declare the action of the respondents seeking eviction of the petitioners from the Coconut Garden covered in R.S.No.109N, 120A, an extent of 1260 Sq. Yards, Situated at Rayakuduru Village, Veeravasaram Mandal, West Godavari District as illegal arbitrary and contrary to the provisions of Grama Panchayat Act consequently direct the respondents not to evict the petitioners from the Coconut Garden covered in R.S.No.109N, 120A, an extent of 1260 Sq. Yards, situated at Rayakuduru Village, Veeravasaram Mandal, West Godavari District and to 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 pleased to stay of all further proceedings including eviction of the petitioners from the land including Coconut Garden covered in Sy. No. 109N, 120A extent of 1260 Sq. Yards, situated at Rayakuduru Village, Veeravasaram Mandal, West Godavari District pending disposal of the above writ petition and to pass Counsel for the Petitioner(S): 1. P R K AMERANDRA KUMAR Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. GP FOR PANCHAYAT RAJ RURAL DEV 2. GP FOR REVENUE 3. GP FOR IRRI AND CAD The Court made the following: 3 THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE VENKATESWARLU NIMMAGADDA WRIT PETITION NO: 19169/2025 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 declare the action of the respondents seeking eviction of the petitioners from the Coconut Garden covered in R.S.No.109N, 120A, an extent of 1260 Sq. Yards, Situated at Rayakuduru Village, Veeravasaram Mandal, West Godavari District as illegal, arbitrary and contrary to the provisions of Grama Panchayat Act and consequently direct the respondents not to evict the petitioners from the Coconut Garden covered in R.S.No.109N, 120A, an extent of 1260 Sq. Yards, situated at Rayakuduru Village, Veeravasaram Mandal, West Godavari District and pass such other order.” 2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned Government Pleader for the respondents. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the 5th respondent granted lease of coconut trees garden situated at Sy.No.109N, 120A, admeasuring to an extent of 1260 Sq. Yards in favour of the petitioners’ father. As per the lease agreement there is no time limit prescribed. After the death of the petitioners’ father, the petitioners are in possession and enjoyment of the subject coconut garden. Further, the petitioners are also paying tree tax/lease amount to the 5th respondent, without any default. While so, the respondents are trying to evict the petitioners from the subject 4 coconut garden without following due process of law. Hence, the present Writ Petition. 4. On the other hand, learned Government Pleader for the respondents submits that the respondents will not evict the petitioners from the subject garden without following due process of law. 5. Considering the submissions made by both the learned counsel and on perusal of the material placed on record, this Court deems it appropriate to dispose of the Writ Petition directing the respondents not to evict the petitioners from the subject coconut garden, without following due process of law. 6. 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 2244..0077..22002255 TTPPSS 5 398 HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE VENKATESWARLU NIMMAGADDA WRIT PETITION NO:19169 of 2025 2244..0077..22002255 TTPPSS