MADAKA APPALANAIDU v. The State of Andhra Pradesh,
WP/21796/2025 · 2025-08-18
Venkata Jyothirmai Pratapa
body2025
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 29274 (AP) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 29274 (AP) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
1
APHC010418222025
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3396] TUESDAY,THE NINETEENTH DAY OF AUGUST TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA WRIT PETITION NO: 21796/2025 Between:
1. MADAKA APPALANAIDU, S/O. LATE GANGAYYA, AGED ABOUT 65 YEARS,R/O. D. NO. 2-230, MADAKAPALEM VILLAGE,PARAVADA MANDAL, VISAKHAPATNAM DISTRICT. 2. MADAKA LAXMI, ,W/O. APPALANAIDU, AGED ABOUT 60 YEARS,R/O. D. NO. 2-230, MADAKAPALEM VILLAGE,PARAVADA MANDAL, VISAKHAPATNAM DISTRICT. 3. MADAKA SANTHOSH,, W/O. APPALANAIDU, AGED ABOUT 34 YEARS,R/O. D. NO. 2-230, MADAKAPALEM VILLAGE,PARAVADA MANDAL, VISAKHAPATNAM DISTRICT. 4. MADAKA CHINNA RAO,, S/O. LATE GANGAYYA, AGED ABOUT 59 YEARS,R/O. D. NO. 2-232, MADAKAPALEM VILLAGE,PARAVADA MANDAL, VISAKHAPATNAM DISTRICT. 5. MADAKA NOOKARATNAM,, S/O. CHINNA RAO, AGED ABOUT 53 YEARS,R/O. D. NO. 2-232, MADAKAPALEM VILLAGE,PARAVADA MANDAL, VISAKHAPATNAM DISTRICT. 6. MADAKA GANESH, ,S/O. CHINNA RAO, AGED ABOUT 31 YEARS,R/O. D. NO. 2-232, MADAKAPALEM VILLAGE,PARAVADA MANDAL, VISAKHAPATNAM DISTRICT. ...PETITIONER(S) AND
1. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, HOME DEPARTMENT, VELAGAPUDI, AMARAVATHI,
2
GUNTUR DISTRICT. 2. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, ANAKAPALLI, ANAKAPALLI DISTRICT. 3. THE SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, ANAKAPALLI, ANAKAPALLI DISTRICT. 4. THE STATION HOUSE OFFICER, PARAVADA POLICE STATION, ANAKAPALLI DISTRICT. 5. MADAKA VENKATA APPARAO, S/O. APPARAO, AGED ABOUT 43 YEARS, R/O. D. NO. 2-115, MADAKAPALEM VILLAGE, PARAVADA MANDAL, VISAKHAPATNAM DISTRICT. 6. G MADAKA ESWARA RAO, S/O. APPARAO, AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS, R/O. D. NO. 2-115, MADAKAPALEM VILLAGE, PARAVADA MANDAL, VISAKHAPATNAM DISTRICT. 7. MADAKA BABJI, S/O. VENKATA RAMANA, AGED ABOUT 31 YEARS, R/O. D. NO. 2-254, MADAKAPALEM VILLAGE, PARAVADA MANDAL, VISAKHAPATNAM DISTRICT. 8. MADAKA MANISIDDI LAXMI NARASIMHAM, S/O. GOVINDA RAO, AGED ABOUT 20 YEARS, R/O. D. NO. 2-254, MADAKAPALEM VILLAGE, PARAVADA MANDAL, 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 to issue an appropriate writ, order or direction more one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the Respondent No.4 in interfering with the peaceful possession and enjoyment of petitioners property to an extent of Ac.1.28 Cents in Sy.
No. 107/25, 107/27, 107/28, 107/29 and 114/8, in Mantripalem Village, Paravada Mandal, Anakapalli District by threatening the petitioners to vacate the premises basing on the Judgment and Decree dated 27.02.2023 in O.S. No. 228 of 2015 on the file of The Additional Senior Judge, Anakapalle and Judgment and Decree dated 02.12.2024 in O.S. No. 128 of 2015 on the file of The Principal Civil Judge (Junior Division), Anakapalle is illegal, arbitrary and discriminative and violative Articles 14, 19 and 21 of the Constitution of India and Consequently direct the respondent authorities not to harass the petitioners to vacate from their property to an extent of Ac.1.28 Cents in Sy. No. 107/25, 107/27, 107/28, 107/29 and 114/8, in Mantripalem Village, Paravada Mandal,
3
Anakapalli District by interfering in civil disputes between the petitioners and unofficial respondents and to pass such 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 respondent authorities not to harass the petitioners to vacate from their property to an extent of Ac. 1.28 Cents in Sy. No. 107/25, 107/27, 107/28, 107/29 & 114/8, in Mantripalem Village, Paravada Mandal, Anakapalli District by interfering in civil disputes between the petitioners and unofficial respondents pending disposal of the above writ petition and to pass such Counsel for the Petitioner(S):
1. SARANU PHANI TEJA Counsel for the Respondent(S):
1.
GP FOR HOME
4
THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA WRIT PETITION NO: 21796 of 2025 ORDER:
This Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of Constitution of India with the following prayer for:
“…pleased to issue an appropriate writ, order or direction more one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the Respondent No.4 in interfering with the peaceful possession and enjoyment of petitioners’ property to an extent of Ac.1.28 Cents in Sy. No. 107/25, 107/27, 107/28, 107/29 and 114/8, in Mantripalem Village, Paravada Mandal, Anakapalli District by threatening the petitioners to vacate the premises basing on the Judgment and Decree dated 27.02.2023 in O.S. No. 228 of 2015 on the file of The Additional Senior Judge, Anakapalle and Judgment and Decree dated 02.12.2024 in O.S. No. 128 of 2015 on the file of The Principal Civil Judge (Junior Division), Anakapalle is illegal, arbitrary and discriminative and violative Articles 14, 19 and 21 of the Constitution of India and Consequently direct the respondent authorities not to harass the petitioners to vacate from their property to an extent of Ac.1.28 Cents in Sy.No. 107/25, 107/27, 107/28, 107/29 and 114/8, in Mantripalem Village, Paravada Mandal, Anakapalli District by interfering in civil disputes between the petitioners and unofficial respondents and to pass such…”
2. Sri Saranu Phani Teja, learned counsel for the petitioners would submit that the grievance of the petitioners is that the police are interfering with the peaceful possession and enjoyment of the petitioners’ property to an extent of Ac.1.28 cents in Sy.Nos.107/25, 107/27, 107/28, 107/29 and 114/8 in Mantripalem. 3. Sri V.Farooq, learned Assistant Government Pleader would submit that the police are not interfering in the civil disputes between the petitioners and the unofficial respondents. 5
4. Recording the above said submissions, the Writ Petition is disposed of. However, the petitioners are at liberty to work out their remedies before the appropriate forum. No order as to costs. As a sequel thereto, miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shall stand closed. _________________________________________ Dr. JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA Date: 19.08.2025.
UPS
6
HON’BLE DR. JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA
W.P.No.21796 of 2025
Dated.19.08.2025
UPS
119