APHC010434682025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) 0 THURSDAY, THE TWENTY FIRST DAY OF AUGUsffo TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE TARLADA RAJASEKHAR RAO WRIT PETITION NO: 221S8 OF 2025 O Between: D. Chandrakala, W/o. L. Chittibabu, Aged about 43 years, Occ; Cultivation R/o. Kammaguttapalli Village, Puthalapattu Mandal, Chittoor District ...Petitioner AND T!t- ^ 01 ^ X f A f! d f i Fiddesh Kepresentea ncipai occrciary, Amaravathi, Guntur 5.0 i i Revenue Department, Secretariat Buildings, District. 2. The District Collector, Chittoor District at Chittoor. 3. The Tahsildar, Puthalapattu Mandal, Chittoor District. 4. The Village Revenue Officer, Palakuru Village, Puthalapattu Mandal, Chittoor District. 5. P Jayababu Naidu, S/o. P. Rama Naidu, Aged about 55 R/o. Kammaguttapalli Village, Puthalapattu Mandal, years, Occ: Cultivation, Chittoor District. 6. S Ravichandra Naidu, S/o. S. Chengalraya Naidu, Age. Not Known, Occ: Cultivation, R/o. Kammaguttapalli Village, Puthalapattu Mandal, Chittoor District. ...Respondents praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India ■ pleased to issue a WRIT OF MANDAMUS declaring the action of the Respondents herein particularly Respondent Nos.3 and 4 in highhandedly interfering and threatening to dispossess the petitioner from the peaceful possession and enjoyment of the property of an extent of Ac. 1.40 cents, situated at Sy.No. 1058-1 of Palakuru Village, Puthalapattu Mandal, Chittoor District, on the instigation of Respondent Nos, 5 and 6, despite pendency of a suit in O.S.No.650 of 2025, on the file of II Additional Judicial First Class Magistrate, Chittoor and without issuing any notice or opportunity of personal hearing or following the due process of law is questioned as the same is arbitrary, illegal, contrary to the well-established legal principles apart from being violative of fundamental and constitutional rights guaranteed under articles 14, 19, 21 and 300-A of the Constitution of India and consequently direct the Respondents, not to interfere with the petitioner's peaceful possession and enjoyment of the subject property. iA NO: 1 OF 2025 Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the writ petition, the High Court may be pleased to direct the Respondents, not to interfere with the petitioner’s peaceful possession and enjoyment of the subject property of an extent of Ac. 1.40 cents, situated at Sy.No. 1058-1 of Palakuru Village, Puthalapattu Mandal, Chittoor District, pending disposal of the Writ petition before this Hon’ble court. Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI SURESH KUMAR REDDY KALAVA Counsel for the Respondent Nos.1 to 4 : GP FOR REVENUE Counsel for the Respondent Nos.5 & 6 : NONE APPEARED The Court made the following order: APHC010434682025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3330] THURSDAY, THE TWENTY FIRST DAY OF AUGUST TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE TARLADA RAJASEKHAR RAO WRIT PETITION NO: 22188/2025 Between: 1.D CHANDRAKALA, W/0 L. CHITTIBABU, AGED ABOUT 43 YEARS, OCC. CULTIVATION, R/0 KAMMAGUTTAPALLI VILLAGE, PUTHALAPATTU MANDAL, CHITTOOR DISTRICT. ...PETITIONER AND 1.THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH. REPRESENTED BY ITS REVENUE DEPARTMENT, PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, SECRETARIAT BUILDINGS DISTRICT. 2.THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR. CHITTOOR DISTRICT AT CHITTOOR 3.THE TAHSILDAR, PUTHALAPATTU MANDAL. CHITTOOR district 4.THE VILLAGE REVENUE OFFICER. PALAKURU VILLAGE, PUTHALAPATTU MANDAL, CHITTOOR DISTRICT 5.P JAYABABU NAIDU, S/0 P. RAMA NAIDU, AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS, OCC. CULTIVATION, R/0 KAMMAGUTTAPALLI VILLAGE, PUTHALAPATTU MANDAL. CHITTOOR DISTRICT 6.S RAVICHANDRA NAIDU, S/0 S. CHENGALRAYA NAIDU, age. not known, OCC. CULTIVATION KAMMAGUTTAPALLI VILLAGE, PUTHALAPATTU MANDAL. CHITTOOR DISTRICT A^/^AP A\/ATH! m IMT! IP . •. i V J / . i ■». . w . . ; i i i , w w i s i i \ R/0 ...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 OF MANDAMUS declaring the action of the Respondents herein particularly Respondent Nos.3 and 4 in highhandedly interfering and threatening to dispossess the petitioner from the peaceful possession and enjoyment of the property of an extent of Ac. 1.40 cents, situated at Sy.No.1058-1 of Palakuru Village, Puthalapattu Mandal, Chittoor District, on the instigation of 2 ^ pendency of a suit in O.S.No 650 of 2025, on the file of II Additional Judicial First Class Magistrate Chittoor and without issuing any notice or opportunity of personal hearing or following the due process of law is questioned as the same IS arbitrary, illegal, contrary to the well-established legal principles apart from being violative of fundamental and constitutional rights India and C " ' 1^, 19, 21 and 300-A of the Constitution of hf nethtn J Respondents, not to interfere with proprrtrand pass®'' lA NO: 1 OF 2()?R stated^tn’me affidL/f n°d circumstances Stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition the Hiah o'etLn'e?®"'®' Respondents, ™t to inSwi^'.he of an ey enfT! enjoyment of the subject property of an extent of Ac. 1.40 cents, situated at Sy. No. 1058-1 of Palakum Village, Puthalapattu Mandal, Chittoor District Writ petition before this Hon’ble Court Counsel for the Petitioner; 1 SURESH KUMAR REDDY KALAVA Counsel for the Responclent(S)- 1.GP FOR REVENUE The Court made the follnwing- pending disposal of the and pass / THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE TARLADA RAJASEKHAR RAO WRIT PETITION NO. 22188 of 2025 ORDER: The writ petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking the following relief: ‘‘...to issue a writ of mandamus declaring the action of the Respondents herein particularly Respondent Nos. 3 and 4 In highhandedly interfering and threatening to dispossess the petitioner from the peaceful possession and enjoyment of the property of an extent of Ac.1.40 cents, situated at Sy.No.1058-1 of Palakuru Village, Puthalapattu Mandal, Chittoor District, on the instigation of Respondent Nos. 5 and 6, despite pendency of a suit in O.S.No.650 of 2025 on the file of II Additional Judicial First Class Magistrate, Chittoor and without issuing any notice or opportunity of personal hearing or following the due process of law is questioned as the same Is arbitrary, illegal, contrary to the well-established legal principles apart from being violative of fundamental and constitutional rights guaranteed under Articles 14, id, 21 and 300-A of the Constitution of India and consequently direct the Respondents, not to interfere with the petitioner's peaceful possession and enjoyment of the subject property and pass such other or further orders as this Hon’ble Court may deem fit and proper in the circumstances of the case. ” Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that admittedly, there are disputes between the petitioner and the unofficial respondents 5 and 6 and the petitioner is in possession and enjoyment of the property to an extent of Ac. 1.40 cents situated at Survey No. 1058-1 of Palakuru Village, Puthalapattu Mandal, Chittoor District, which is inherited from his ancestor senior paternal grandfather one D.Chengalaraya Naidu, S^o.D.Nasama Naidu and the revenue authorities also issued pattadar passbook and title deed in his favour. While so, the respondent authorities are trying to interfere with the 2. 4 poss6ssion of ths potitionor over the subject land at the instigation of the unofficial respondents 5 and 6, without following the due of law. Hence, the present writ petition is filed. process • 3. In Rame Gowda V. M.Varadappa Naidu, reported in (2004)1 while discussing the as under; “It is thus clear that IS concerned, the person in peaceful possession possession and in order to protect see 769, a three-Judge Bench of Apex Court Indian law on the subject, observed so far as the Indian law i IS entitled to retain his such possession he trespasser. A rightful land may retake may even use reasonable force owner who has been to keep out a wrongfully dispossessed of possession if he can do use of unreasonable force. If the trespasser is i SO peacefully and without the in settled possession of the property belonging to the rightful owner, the rightful have to take owner shall recourse to law. 4. In, H.B.Yogalaya l/s. State (2004) 13 see 518 the notice or hearing neither demolition be dispossessed from the of U.P. and others, reported in apex Court held that without any show cause can take place nor property, to quote relevant portion; a person may "Othen^ise also principles of natural Justice demand that a show- cause notice and hearing be dispossessing possession. Counsel contest this proposition. given before demolishing a person from the properties of which he Is in or appearing for the respondents did not 5 "It is well settled that the law requires that the tru . owner should dispossess the trespasser by taking recourse to the remedies under, the law." 5. In the celebrated case of ManeA^a GandA?/vs Union of India, AIR 1978 SC 25, the Hon'ble Supreme Court uph i id the phrase no one shall be deprived of one’s life and liberty except procedure established by law as employed in Article 21 of tlie Constitution of India. The principles of natural justice demands tha the persons who are affected should be heard. Hence, this Court is of the opinion that the petitioner should not 6. be dispossessed except in accordance with the la w as held by the Rame Gowda’s case that the petitioner who is continue in such he shouldn’t dispossess without jeing except in possession accordance with law Therefore, the Writ Petition is disposed of directing the 7. respondents not to dispossess the petitioner, except 'ollowing the due procedure as conteiriplated in law. No order as to costs. As a sequel thereto, miscellaneous Petition;-: pending, if any. shall stand closed. Sd/- M. SRINIVAS T REGISTRAR ASSIST //TRUE COPY// FFICER To, 1. The Principal Secretary, Revenue DepartmeMot, State of Andhra Pradesh, Secretariat Buildings, Amaravathi, Guntur District. 2. The District Collector, Chittoor District at Chittocr . 3. The Tahsildar, Puthalapattu Mandal, Chittoor Dfstrict. 4. The Village Revenue Officer, Palakuru Village, -'uthalapattu Mandal, Chittoor District. 5. One CC to Sri Suresh Kumar Reddy Kalava, Advocate [OPUC] 6. Two CCs to GP for Revenue, High Court of Andhra Pradesh [OUT] 7. Two CD Copies Cnr \ HIGH COURT r DATED:21/08/2025 ORDER WP NO. 22188 OF 2025 sT < 0 SEP 2025 Sectjgitx^y disposing of the w p WITHOUT COSTS