IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH :: AMA MONDAY, THE SEVENTEENTH DAY OF MARChI^^^^^ TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE R.RAGHUNANDAN RAO C'V m AND THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE K.MANMADHA RAO WRIT APPEAL NO: 753 OF 2094 Writ Appeal under Clause 15 of the Letters Patent 04.01.2024 passed in WP No. 32751 of 2023 on the file of the High Court. Between: 1. C. Sreenivasulu Reddy, S/o Nagi Reddy, aged about 56 years R/o Chawanagaya Palli Village, Kondapuram Mandal, Kadapa District. . P. Venl^ta Narayana Reddy, S/o. Adi Narayana Reddy, aged about years, R/o Chawanagaya Palli Village, Kondapuram Mandal District. ...Appellants/Leave Petitioners preferred against order dt. 47 Kadapa AND 1. B. Prasanna Lakshmi, W/o Bodayyagari Sankara Narayana Reddy aged about 37 years R/o 1-35, Chawanagaya Palli Village Yenamalachintala Mandal, Kadapa District. 2. Bodayyagari Chandra Kalavathi, W/o Bodaiah Gari Lingareddy about 70 years, R/o. 2-12, Chawanagaya Palli Village, Yenamalachintala Mandal, Kadapa District. 3. Chavva Aruna, W/o Chawa Ramireddy, aged about 39 Chawanagaya Palli Village, Yenamalachintala Mandal aged years, R/o 3-24, Kadapa District. 4. Chavva Narasamma, W/o Chawa Venkata Kondareddy R/o Chawanagaya Paiii Viiiage, Yenamaiachintaia Mandai, kadapa District. W/o Chappidi Venkata Kondareddy, aged SaKpa ^--aia^chintaia Varaiakshmi, W/o Lingareddy, aged about42 years, R/o Disfr’irt ^®"3'^3iachintaia Mandai, Kadapa 7. Agile Prabhavathi, W/o Agile Venkata Kondareddy, aged about 54 years R/o. 1/35 East Palem Village, Tadipatri Mandal, Anantapur District 8. Kommaraja Kullayi Reddy, S/o Komma Chinna Kullai Reddy, aged about 52 years, R/o. 3/24 Devathapuram Village and Mandal, Kadapa District. ^ ^ ^ ...Respondent No’s. 1 to 8/Writ Petitioners 9. The State of Andhra Pradesh, Rep by its PrI. Secretary to Govt Revenue Department, Secretariat, Velagapudi. Guntur. District Collector, YSR Kadapa District. Revenue Divisional Officer, Jammalamadugu Division YSR Kadapa District. Tahsildar, Kondapuram Puram Mandal, YSR Kadapa District, 10. 11. 12. A.P. ...Respondents/Respondents lA NO: 3 OF 2024 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 to direct the writ petitioners herein to maintain status quo as existing on the date of final order dated in 28.12.2015 in W.P. No. 41749 of 2015 pending disposal of writ appeal. \A NO: 4 OF 2024 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 to Suspend the operation of impugned order dt.04.01.2024 in WP No.32751 of 2023 passed by the learned single judge Honourable Court pending disposal of writ appeal. Counsel for the Appellant: SRI N SAI PHANINDRA KUMAR Counsel for the Respondents 1 to 8: M/s KODATI RAMYA KRISHNA Counsel for the Respondents 9 to 12: GP FOR REVENUE The Court made the following judgment: passed of this 4 APHC010387352024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3525] MONDAY, THE SEVENTEENTH DAY OF MARCH TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE R RAGHUNANDAN RAO THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE K MANMADHA RAO WRIT APPEAL NO: 753/2024 Between: C. Sreenivasulu Reddy and Others ...APPELLANT{S) AND B Prasanna Lakshmi and Others Counsel for the Appellant{S): 1.N SAI PHANINDRA KUMAR Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1.GP FOR REVENUE 2.KODATI RAMYA KRISHNA The Court made the following Judgment: (per Hon’ble Sri Justice R. Raghunandari Rao) ...RESPONDENT(S) The respondents 1 to 8 had been assigned land of Ac.2.50 cents, in Sy.No.134, in the year-2011, of Yanamala Chinthala Village, Kondapuram Mandal, Kadapa District. The said assignment was challenged by the appellants herein, by way of W.P.No.33840 of 2011, before the erstwhile High Court of Judicature at Hyderabad. The said Writ Petition is still pending. The respondents 1 to 8 had then approached this Court by way of W.P.No.32751 of 2023, on the ground that the respondent-Tahsilda r was trying to interfere with the possession and enjoyment of the land which had been assigned to them, by way of DKT pattas. The contention of the respondents was that they are in possession of the land and there is no 2. 2 dispute regarding their DKT pattas despite which the respondent-Tahsildar was trying to evict them from the land. A Learned Single Judge of this Court, by Order dated 04.01.2024, on the basis of the DKT pattas issued, in favour of the respondents 1 to 8, had disposed of the Writ Petition with a direction to the authorities not to interfere with the possession and enjoyment of the land, by the respondents 1 to 8, except under due process of law. 3. Aggrieved by the said Order dated 04.01.2024, the appellants have approached this Court by way of the present Writ Appeal. The contention of the appellants is that there were disputes over the enjoyment of the land in as much as the respondents 1 to 8 were seeking to cultivate the land under the DKT pattas while the appellants and other farmers in the area are opposing the same as the land was earlier being used as grazing land for their cattle. Crime No.82 of 2011, was also registered by the Station House Officer, Talla Proddutur Police Station, in this regard. Subsequently, the Tahsildar, Kondapuram Mandal, by his proceedings, dated 29.06.2015, had issued Orders, under Section 145 of Cr.P.C, prohibiting the respondents 1 to 8 as well as the appellants and other farmers of the from entering into this land until the disposal of W.P.No.33840 of 2011. Subsequently, the Tahsildar had initiated proceedings against the respondents 1 to 8, to resume the said lands on the ground of non-cultivation of the land. Aggrieved by the said proceedings, the respondents 1 to 8 had again approached the erstwhile High Court of Judicature at Hyderabad for the State of Telangana and the State of Andhra Pradesh, by way of 4. area 3 W.P.No.41749 of 2015. In this Writ Petition, the respondents 1 to 8 had taken the specific plea that they were unable to enter upon the land or cultivate the land on account of the proceedings of the Tahsildar, dated 29.06.2015, issued under Section 145 of Cr.P.C and consequently, the land cannot be resumed from them on the ground of non-cultivation of the land. This Writ Petition was disposed of by a Learned Single Judge of the Common High Court of Andhra Pradesh, by an Order dated 28.12.2015. In this Order, the Writ Petition filed by the respondents 2 to 8 was dismissed on the ground of non-payment of individual court fee and the Writ Petition was disposed of, in relation to the 1"* respondent, by holding that the Tahsildar could not have initiated proceedings for resumption, when the respondents 1 to 8 were unable to enter the land on account of the directions of the Tahsildar himself. The Learned Single Judge after noticing these facts had directed the respondent to submit her reply to the show-cause notice issued by the Tahsildar and no steps were to be taken till appropriate orders were passed. 5. The appellants would now contend that the proceedings of the Tahsildar, under Section 145 of Cr.P.C, the subsequent initiation of resumption proceedings and the filing of W.P.No.41749 of 2015 and the plea of the respondents that they were not in possession of the land and that they could not enter the land have been suppressed in W.P.No.32751 of 2023 filed before this Court and Orders have been obtained from the Learned Single Judge without setting out all the facts. 4 V ■ 6. Sri Solomon Raju, learned counsel appearing for the respondents 1 to 8 would contend that there was no willful suppression of facts. He would event, the Orders of the Learned Single Judge, in of 2015 would at best apply to the respondent and the would not be applicable to the respondents 2 to 8. further submit that in any W.P.No.41749 same Though, W.P.No.41749 of 2015 had been disposed of in relation to the 1®‘ respondent only, the fact remains that the respondents 1 to 8 had not able to enter the land on account of the Tahsildar, under Section-145 of Cr.P.C. In such 7. collectively taken the plea that they were of the proceedings circumstances, the non-mention of the aforesaid proceedings, would amount to suppression of fact. It is settled law that this Court would not assist or help any person who has come with un-clean hands before this Court by suppressing facts, this Writ Appeal is allowed setting aside the Order of the Learned Single Judge, dated 04.01.2024, in 2023. There shall be no order as to costs, sequel, pending miscellaneous petitions, if any, shall stand 8. 9. In the circumstances. W.P.No.32751 of As a Sd/- E KAMESWARA RAO \ JOINT REGISTRAR \ closed. //true copy// OFFICER SE To, State of Andhra 1. 2 The District Coliector. YSR Kadapa District. Divisionai Officer, Jammaiamadugu puram Mandal Division, YSR 3. The Revenue Kadapa District. 4. The Tahsildar, Kondapuram YSR Kadapa District, A.P- 5. One CC to Sri N Sai Phanindra Kumar, Advocate [OPUC] 6. One CC to M/s Kodati Ramya Krishna, Advocate [OPUC] 7. Two CCs to GP for Revenue, High Court of Andhra 8. Two CD Copies Pradesh. [OUT] RAM HIGH COURT DATED:17/03/2025 I 25 MAR 2025 Currenl Section ^^iS&PATCHeS^ JUDGMENT WA.No.753 of 2024 m Pi) ALLOWING THE WRIT APPEAL WITHOUT COSTS