Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Andhra Pradesh · body

2025 DAILYLAW 28545 (AP)

MADAKAM VENKATESWARA RAO v. The State of Andhra Pradesh

WP/21064/2025 · 2025-08-17

Venkata Jyothirmai Pratapa

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

APHC010406512025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3396] MONDAY, THE EIGHTEENTH DAY OF AUGUST TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA WRIT PETITION NO: 21064/2025 Between: 1. MADAKAM VENKATESWARA RAO, S/O MUTHYALU, AGED ABOUT 52 YEARS, R/O MADAKAM VARI GUDEM, JEELUGUMILLI MANDAL ELURU DISTRICT. 2. B MUTYALAMMA,, W/O VENKATESH, AGE 52 YEARS, R/O MADAKAM VARI GUDEM, JEELUGUMILLI MANDAL ELURU DISTRICT. 3. . PODIUM SREENU,, S/O VENKAPPA, AGE 31 YEARS, R/O MADAKAM VARI GUDEM, JEELUGUMILLI MANDAL ELURU DISTRICT. 4. B. NAGESAWRA RAO,, S/O MUTYALU, AGE 40 YEARS, R/O MADAKAM VARI GUDEM, JEELUGUMILLI MANDAL ELURU DISTRICT. 5. . PODIUM RAMESH,, S/O VENKAPPA, AGE 37 YEARS, R/O MADAKAM VARI GUDEM, JEELUGUMILLI MANDAL, ELURU DISTRICT. 6. . PODIUM SWAMY,, S/O VENKAPPA, AGE 35 YEARS, R/O MADAKAM VARI GUDEM, JEELUGUMILLI MANDAL ELURU DISTRICT. 7. . KUNJA GEETHA BHAVANI, W/O BHEEMUDU, AGE 35 YEARS, R/O MADAKAM VARI GUDEM, JEELUGUMILLI MANDAL, ELURU DISTRICT. 8. . KUNJA PUSHPA,, W/O MALLESH, AGE 46 YEARS, R/O 2 MADAKAM VARI GUDEM, JEELUGUMILLI MANDAL ELURU DISTRICT. 9. KUNJA SANTAMMA,, W/O VENKATESU, AGE 59 YEARS, R/O DATTAVARO GUDEM, JEELUGUMILLI MANDAL ELURU DISTRICT. 10. KUNJA RAMALAKSHMI,, W/O RAMAKRISHNA, AGE 49 YEARS, R/O DATTAVARO GUDEM, JEELUGUMILLI MANDAL, ELURU DISTRICT. 11. KUNJA SAROJINI,, W/O MUTHYLA RAO, AGE 43 YEARS, R/O DATTAVARO GUDEM, JEELUGUMILLI MANDAL ELURU DISTRICT. 12. KUNJA MANI, W/O RAMBABU, AGE 32 YEARS, R/O DATTAVARO GUDEM, JEELUGUMILLI MANDAL ELURU DISTRICT. 13. MADAKAM MAHALAKSHMI,, W/O SESHA RAO, AGE 52 YEARS, R/O DATTAVARO GUDEM, JEELUGUMILLI MANDAL, ELURU DISTRICT. 14. KUNJA BHADRAMMA,, W/O VENKATESWARA RAO, AGE 41 YEARS, R/O DATTAVARO GUDEM, JEELUGUMILLI MANDAL ELURU DISTRICT. 15. KUNJA PAAPAMMA,, W/O SATTIBABU, AGE 31 YEARS, R/O DATTAVARO GUDEM, JEELUGUMILLI MANDAL, ELURU DISTRICT. 16. KUNJA LAKSHMI,, W/O DURGA RAO, AGE 34 YEARS, R/O DATTAVARO GUDEM, JEELUGUMILLI MANDAL ELURU DISTRICT. 17. MADAKAM SILAKAMMA,, W/O VENKATESU, AGE 43 YEARS, R/O DATTAVARO GUDEM, JEELUGUMILLI MANDAL ELURU DISTRICT. 18. KUNJA NAGAMANI,, W/O VENKATESU, AGE 44 YEARS, R/O DATTAVARO GUDEM, JEELUGUMILLI MANDAL ELURU DISTRICT. 19. MOGALI KRISHNA VENI,, W/O CHANDA RAO, AGE 35 YEARS, R/O P NARAYANA PURAM, JEELUGUMILLI MANDAL, ELURU DISTRICT. 20. GEDDAM RAMAN,, W/O DURGA RAO, AGE 35 YEARS, R/O P NARAYANA PURAM, JEELUGUMILLI MANDAL ELURU DISTRICT. 21. SARINA DURGA,, W/O SRINIVASA RAO, AGE 33 YEARS, R/O P 3 NARAYANA PURAM, JEELUGUMILLI MANDAL, ELURU DISTRICT. 22. GEDDAM NAGABABU,, S/O DURGA RAO, AGE 33 YEARS, R/O P NARAYANA PURAM, JEELUGUMILLI MANDAL ELURU DISTRICT. 23. KOORAM BODAYYA,, S/O GANGA RAJU, AGE 58 YEARS, R/O IPPALAPADU, JEELUGUMILLI MANDAL ELURU DISTRICT. 24. PUSAM RAMALAKSHMI,, W/O SRIRAMULU, AGE 73 YEARS, R/O IPPALAPADU, JEELUGUMILLI MANDAL ELURU DISTRICT. 25. KOVVASI NAGAMAIN,, W/O BORAYYA, AGE 54 YEARS, R/O IPPALAPADU, JEELUGUMILLI MANDAL ELURU DISTRICT. 26. KANITI MALLAYYA,, S/O GANGULU, AGE 44 YEARS, R/O IPPALAPADU, JEELUGUMILLI MANDAL ELURU DISTRICT. 27. KARAM RAMUDU,, S/O GANGULU, AGE 55 YEARS, R/O IPPALAPADU, JEELUGUMILLI MANDAL, ELURU DISTRICT 28. MADAKAM VEERESU,, S/O MUTYALU, AGE 38 YEARS, R/O MADAKAM VAARI GUDEM, JEEIUGUMILLI MANDAL ELURU DISTRICT 29. PODIYAM RAJAMMA,, W/O VENKAPPA, AGE 54 YEARS, R/O MADAKAM VAARI GUDEM, JEELUGUMILLI MANDAL, ELURU DISTRICT 30. GORE VENKATESU,, S/O SEETAYYA, AGE 40 YEARS, R/O MADAKAM VAARI GUDEM, JEELUGUMILLI MANDAL, ELURU DISTRICT 31. MADAKAM CHINNA VEERESU,, S/O BHEEMUDU, AGE 36 YEARS, R/O MADAKAM VAARI GUDEM, JEELUGUMILLI MANDAL ELURU DISTRICT 32. POTTA JAYARAJU,, S/O NARASAYYA, AGE 35 YEARS, R/O VELUTURUVAARI GUDEM, JEELUGUMILLI MANDAL ELURU DISTRICT ...PETITIONER(S) AND 1. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP BY ITS PRI.SECRETARY, HOME DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT, VELAGAPUDI, AMARAVATI, 4 GUNTUR DISTRICT. 2. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, ELURU DISTRICT, ELURU 3. THE SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, ELURU DISTRICT, ELURU 4. THE CIRCLE INSPECTOR, JEELUGUMILLI CIRCLE, JEELUGUMILLI. 5. THE STATION HOUSE OFFICER, JEELUGUMILLI POLICE STATION, JEELUGUMILLI. 6. THE TAHSILDAR, JEELUGUMILLI MANDAL JEELUGUMILLI. 7. CHANDA PRASAD, AGE NOT KNOWN S/O NOT KNOWN KAMAYYAPALEM, JEELUGUMILLI MANDAL 8. PERABATHULA PUNNAIAH, S/O VENKATRAMAIAH, P.ANKAMPALEM, JEELUGUMILLI MANDAL. 9. KARAM VENKATESWARA RAO, S/O PEDDAGANGULU, R/O GAJULAGONDI, JEELUGUMILLI MANDAL. ...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 order direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declare the action of the respondents in not taking action on the complaint Dt.28/07/2025 against the respondents no 7 to 11 who are interfering with the cultivation of the petitioners lands mentioned in Annexure- B situated at P Naryana Puram Village of Jeelugumilli Mandal, Eluru District, despite there is an order passed by the Hon'ble High Court in W.P.No.651/2023 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned Government Pleader for respondents. In view of the documents filed along with the Writ Petition, the respondents are directed not to dispossess the petitioners from the subject property. Post after four (4) weeks. In the meanwhile, the learned Government Pleader is directed to get instructions in the matter.' and consequently direct the respondents to take action on the complaint made by the petitioners on 28/07/2025 against the respondents 7 to 11 who are interfering with the lands in Annexure-B situated at P Naryana Puram Village of Jeelugumilli Mandal, Eluru District, and to pass IA NO: 1 OF 2025 5 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 direct the respondents 4 and 5 to provide protection against the respondents 7 to 11 who are interfering with the petitioners lands in Annexure-B situated at P Naryana Puram Village of Jeelugumilli Mandal, Eluru District, and to pass Counsel for the Petitioner(S): 1. J RAVI KUMAR Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. GP FOR HOME 6 THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA WRIT PETITION NO: 21064 of 2025 ORDER: This Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of Constitution of India with the following prayer for: “…pleased to issue order direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declare the action of the respondents in not taking action on the complaint dt.28/07/2025 against the respondents Nos. 7 to 11 who are interfering with the cultivation of the petitioners lands mentioned in Annexure-B situated at P Naryana Puram Village of Jeelugumilli Mandal, Eluru District, despite there is an order passed by the Hon'ble High Court in W.P.No.651/2023 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned Government Pleader for respondents. In view of the documents filed along with the Writ Petition, the respondents are directed not to dispossess the petitioners from the subject property. Post after four (4) weeks. In the meanwhile, the learned Government Pleader is directed to get instructions in the matter.' and consequently direct the respondents to take action on the complaint made by the petitioners on 28/07/2025 against the respondents 7 to 11 who are interfering with the lands in Annexure-B situated at P Naryana Puram Village of Jeelugumilli Mandal, Eluru District, and to pass…” 2. When the matter was taken up for hearing, Sri V.Farooq, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Home for the respondents, on receipt of written instructions, would submit that there are civil disputes between the petitioners and the unofficial respondents. Since the matter is of civil in nature, the police are not interfering in the matter. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioners would submit that recording the same, the petition may be disposed of. 7 4. Recording the same, the Writ petition is disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs. However, the petitioners are at liberty to work out their remedies before the appropriate forum according to law. As a sequel thereto, miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shall stand closed. _________________________________________ Dr. JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA Date: 18.08.2025. UPS 8 HON’BLE DR. JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA W.P.No.21064 of 2025 Dated.18.08.2025 UPS 27