APHC010395692025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) TUESDAY,THE FIFTH DAY OF AUGUST TWO THOUSANDAND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE TARLADA RAJASEKHAR RAO WRIT PETITION NO: 20476 OF 2025 Between; Natooru Narasimha Reddy, Aged about 48 years, S/o. N. Ramachandhra Reddy, R/o. Door No. 6/25B, Girija Veedhi, Koduru Village, Railway Kodur Mandal, Annamayya District ...PETITIONER AND 1. The State of Andhra Pradesh, Rep. by its Principal Secretary, Department of Revenue, A.P. Secretariat, Velagapudi, Amaravathi. 2. The District Collector, Annamayya District. 3. The Revenue Divisional officer, Rajampeta Annamayya District. 4. The Tahsildar, Railway Kodur Mandal, Annamayya District. 5. Kalahasti Jyothi, aged about 62 years, W/o. Late Subramanyam, R/o. Shram Nagar, Koduru Village, Koduru Post and Mandal, Annamaya District. 6. Kalahasti Madhavaiah, Venkatasubbaiah Rangareddy District, Telengana. Revenue Division, Aged about 62 years S/o. Late R/o. Cheruku Thota Colony, Saroor Nagar, ...RESPONDENTS Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court pleased to issue may be more particularly one in the of respondents in a writ, order or a direction, nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action attempting to dispossess me of my land, by removing my name from the revenue records from the land, Admeasuring Ac. 0.3183 cents in survey No. 557 in Kodur (west) Viilage, Raiiway Kodur without issuance of notice Mandal, Annamayya District without conducting any enquiry, as illegal, natural justice and in violation of Article arbitrary, against the principals of 300A of the Constitution of India and consequently direct the respondents not my land, by removing my vendors name from the revenue records for the land Admeasuring Ac. 0.3183 cents in survey No 557 in Kodur (west) Village, Railway Kodur without following due process of law. to dispossess me from Mandal, Annamayya District LA NO: 1 OF 209^: Petition under Section 151 CPC in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to direct the respondents not to praying that in the circumstances stated remove my vendors name from the records from the land Admeasuring Ac. 0.3183 cents i Kodur (west) Village, Railway Kodur Mandal revenue in survey No. 557 in Annamayya District. Counsel for the Petitioner: M/s. Counsel for the Respondent Nos.1 Counsel for the Respondent Nos.5 & 6: The Court made the following order: K. SOUNDARYA to 4: GP FOR REVENUE APHC010395692025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) TUESDAY, THE FIFTH DAY OF AUGUST TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE HffiS [3330] PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE TARLADA RAJASEKHAR RAO WRIT PETITION NO: 20476/2025 Between; 1.NATOORU NARASIMHA REDDY, AGED ABOUT 48 YEARS S/0. N. RAMACHANDHRA REDDY R/0. DOOR NO 6/25B GIRIJA VEEDHI MANDAL, ANNAMAYYA DISTRICT. KODURU VILLAGE, RAILWAY KODUR ...PETITIONER AND 1.THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE, SECRETARIAT, VELAGAPUDI, AMARAVATHI. 2.THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, ANNAMAYYA DISTRICT 3.THE REVENUE DIVISIONAL REVENUE DIVISION, ANNAMAYYA DISTRICT. 4.THE TAHSILDAR, RAILWAY KODUR MANDAL, ANNAMAYYA DISTRICT. 5.KALAHASTI JYOTHI, AGED ABOUT 62 YEARS SUBRAMANYAM, R/0. SHRAM NAGAR, KODURU VILLAGE, KODURU POST AND MANDAL, ANNAMAYA DISTRICT. 6.KALAHASTI MADHAVAIAH, AGED ABOUT 62 YEARS S/0 LATE VENKATASUBBAIAH, R/0. CHERUKU THOTA COLONY SAROOR NAGAR, RANGAREDDY DISTRICT, TELENGANA. ...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 to issue a writ, order or a direction, more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus, declaring the action of respondents in attempting to dispossess me of my land, by removing my name from the revenue records from the land admeasuring Ac. 0.3183 cents in survey No. 557 in Kodur (west) Village, Railway Kodur Mandal, Annamayya District without issuance of notice, without conducting any enquiry, as illegal, arbitrary, against the principals of natural justice and in violation of Article 300-A of the Constitution of India and consequently direct the respondents not to SECRETARY, A.P. OFFICER, RAJAMPETA W/0. LATE 2 dispossess me from my land, by removing my vendors name from the revenue records for the land Admeasuring Ac. 0.3183 cents in survey No. 557 in Kodur (west) Village, Railway Kodur Mandal, Annamayya District without following due process of law, and to pass lA 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 to direct the respondents not to remove petitioner’s vendors name from the revenue records from the land admeasuring Ac.0.3183 cents in survey No. 557 in Kodur (west) Village, Railway Kodur Mandal, Annamayya District and to pass Counsel for the Petitioner: 1.KSOUNDARYA Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1.GP FOR REVENUE The Court made the following: THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE TARLADA RAJASEKHAR RAO WRIT PETITION NO. 20476 of 2025 ORDER: The present Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking the following relief: “...to issue a writ, order or a direction, more particularly one In the nature of Writ of Mandamus, declaring the action of respondents In attempting to dispossess the petitioner from his land, by removing his name from the revenue records from the land admeasuring Ac.0.3183 cents In survey No. 557 In Kodur (west) Village, Railway Kodur Mandal, Annamayya District without issuance of notice, without conducting any enquiry, as Illegal, arbitrary, against the principals of natural justice and in violation of Article 300-A of the Constitution of India and consequently direct the respondents not to dispossess him from his land, by removing his vendors name from the revenue records for the land Admeasuring Ac. 0.3183 cents in survey No. 557 in Kodur (west) Village, Railway Kodur Mandal, Annamayya District without following due process of law and pass such other order or orders as this Court may deem fit and proper in the circumstances of the case”. 2. It is the pleading of the petitioner that a person in settled possession of immoveable property is entitled to continue in such possession, without being dispossessed save and except accordance with law. in 3. In Rame Gowda v. M.Varadappa Naidu, reported in (2004)1 see 769, a three-Judge Bench of Apex Court, while discussing the Indian law on the subject, observed as under: “It is thus clear that so far as the Indian law is concerned, the person in peaceful possession is entitled to retain his possession and in order to protect such possession he may even use reasonable force to keep out a 'iTes^passer. A rightful owner who has been wrongfully dispos^sed of 4 land may retake possession if he can do so peacefully and without the use of unreasonable force. If the trespasser is in settled possession of the property belonging to the rightful owner, the rightful owner shall have to take recourse to law.” 4. In the case of Ram Ratan and others Us. State of Uttar Pradesh, reported in 1977(1) SCO 188, question cropped up before Supreme Court with regard to right of private defence of trespasser against true owner. Their Lordships held that true owner has no right to dispossess the trespasser by use of force in case trespasser was in possession in full knowledge of the true owner. Observation made by Hon'ble the Supreme Court is reproduced as under:- “In State of W.B. and others Vs Vishnunarayan and Associates (P) Ltd. and another, reported in (2002) 4 SCO 134, held that State and its executive officers cannot interfere with the rights of others except where their actions are authorized by specific provisions of law. ” In, H.B.Yogalaya Vs. State of U.P. and others, reported in (2004) 13 see 518 the apex Court held that without any show cause notice or hearing neither demolition can take place nor a person may be dispossessed from the property, to quote relevant portion: 5. "Otherwise also principles of natural justice demand that a show- cause notice and hearing be given before demolishing or dispossessing a person from the properties of which he is In possession. Counsel appearing for the respondents did not contest this proposition." 5 "It is well settled that the law requires that the true owner should dispossess the trespasser by taking recourse to the remedies under, the law." In the celebrated case of Maneka Gandhi vs. Union of India, AIR 1978 SC 25, the Hon'ble Supreme Court upheld the phrase one shall be deprived of one’s life and liberty except procedure established by law as employed in Article 21 of the Constitution of India. The principles of natural justice demands that the persons who are affected should be heard. 6. no 7. Hence, this Court is of the opinion that the petitioner should not be dispossessed except in accordance with the law as held by the Rame Gowda s case that the petitioner who is continue in such possession, he shouldn’t dispossess without being except in accordance with law. Therefore, the Writ Petition is disposed of directing the respondents not to dispossess the petitioner except following the due procedure as contemplated in law. There shall be no order as to costs. 8. As a sequel, interlocutory applications, if any pending in this Writ Petition shall stand closed. .TATA RAO Sd/-Kregistrar depute //TRUE COPY// officer SECTIO To, 1. The Principal Secretary, Department of Revenue, State of Andhra Pradesh, A.P. Secretariat, Velagapudi, Amaravathi. 2. The District Collector, Annamayya District. f 3. The Revenue Divisional officer, Rajampeta Revenue Division, Annamayya District. 4. The Tahsildar, Railway Kodur Mandal, Annamayya District. 5. One CC to M/s. K. Soundarya, Advocate [OPUC] 6. Two CCs to GP for Revenue, High Court of Andhra Pradesh [OUT] 7. Two CD Copies. f / / u / / ssb at HIGH COURT DATED;05/08/2025 ORDER WP No.20476 OF 2025 disposing of the w.p. without costs