APHC010448462025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3329] FRIDAY,THE TWELFTH DAY OF SEPTEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE VENKATESWARLU NIMMAGADDA WRIT PETITION NO: 24342/2025 Between: 1. EERUGULA CHINNI, W/O NUKARAJU, AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS, OCC- COOLIE WORK, 3-345, BHOGAPURAM CHAKRAPAANI NAGAR, BHOGAPURAM VILLAGE, PITHAPURAM MANDAL, KAKINADA DISTRICT ERSTWHILE EAST GODAVARI DISTRICT ANDHRA PRADESH - 533445 2. EERUGULA UMA, D/O NUKARAJU, AGED ABOUT 28 YEARS, OCC- HOUSE WIFE, 3-345, BHOGAPURAM CHAKRAPAANI NAGAR, BHOGAPURAM VILLAGE, PITHAPURAM MANDAL, KAKINADA DISTRICT ERSTWHILE EAST GODAVARI DISTRICT ANDHRA PRADESH - 533445. 3. EERUGULA NUKARAJU, S/O SURAYYA, AGED ABOUT 54 YEARS, OCC- COOLIE WORK, 3-345, BHOGAPURAM CHAKRAPAANI NAGAR, BHOGAPURAM VILLAGE, PITHAPURAM MANDAL, KAKINADA DISTRICT ERSTWHILE EAST GODAVARI DISTRICT ANDHRA PRADESH - 533445. ...PETITIONER(S) AND 1. THE STATE OF AP, REPRESENTED BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE, SECRETARIAT OF A P VELAGAPUDI, AMARAVATHI GUNTUR DISTRICT. 2. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, KAKINADA DISTRICT, KAKINADA. 3. THE REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER, KAKINADA REVENUE 2 DIVISION, KAKINADA. 4. THE TAHSILDAR, PITHAPURAM MANDAL, PITHAPURAM MANDAL, KAKINADA DISTRICT ERSTWHILE EAST GODAVARI DISTRIC 5. VILLAGE REVENUE OFFICER, BOGAPURAM, IN THE OFFICE OF TAHSILDAR, PITHAPURAM MANDAL, KAKINADA DISTRICT ERSTWHILE EAST GODAVARI DISTRI 6. SURVEYOR, GRAM SACHIVAIAYAM, BOGAPURAM, PITHAPURAM MANDAL. KAKINADA DISTRICT ERSTWHILE EAST GODAVARI DISTRIC 7. ERUGULA PEDDA LAKSHMI, W/O LATE ARJIBABU (ARJIABBAI), AGED ABOUT 58 YEARS, OCC VRA OF BHOGAPURAM 3-344, BHOGAPURAM CHAKRAPAANI NAGAR, BHOGAPURAM VILLAGE, PITHAPURAM MANDAL, KAKINADA DISTRICT ERSTWHILE EAST GODAVARI DISTRICT ANDHRA PRADESH - 533445. ...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 topleased to pass orders or direction more particularly one in the nature of writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the respondent no.5 and 6 in interfering with the petitioners peaceful possession and enjoyment over the petitioner schedule property 0.5 cents of house property situated at 3-345, Bhogapuram Chakrapaani Nagar, Bhogapuram Village, Pithapuram Mandal, Kakinada District, Erstwhile East Godavari District, Andhra Pradesh - 533445, and threatening the petitioner to vacate the possession of the petitioner is illegal and arbitrary and violative of principles of natural justice and violative of article 19, 21 of the Constitution of India and consequently direct the respondent no. 5 and 6 not to interfere with the peaceful possession and enjoyment of the petitioners schedule property without following the due process of law and also direct the respondent no.4 to take appropriate legal action against the respondent nos. 5 to 7, misusing their power for their personal gain and to conduct departmental enquiry on the respondent no.5 to 7 herein and pass 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 Pleased to direct the respondents herein not to interfere with the petitioners 3 peaceful possession and enjoyment over the petitioner schedule property 0.5 cents of house property situated at 3-345, Bhogapuram Chakrapaani Nagar, Bhogapuram Village, Pithapuram Mandal, Kakinada District, Erstwhile East Godavari District , Andhra Pradesh - 533445, pending disposal of the writ petition and pass pending disposal of the above writ petition and to pass Counsel for the Petitioner(S): 1. SRIDEVI JAMPANI Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. GP FOR REVENUE The Court made the following: 4 THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE VENKATESWARLU NIMMAGADDA WRIT PETITION NO: 24342/2025 ORDER: This writ petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of the India seeking the following reliefs:- “to issue a writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the respondent Nos.5 and 6 in interfering with the petitioners’ peaceful possession and enjoyment over the petitioner schedule property admeasuring to an extent of Ac.0.05 cents of house property situated at 3-345, Bhogapuram Chakrapaani Nagar, Bhogapuram Village, Pithapuram Mandal, Kakinada District, Erstwhile East Godavari District, Andhra Pradesh - 533445, and threatening the petitioners to vacate the same as illegal, arbitrary and violative of principles of natural justice and violative of Articles 19, 21 of the Constitution of India and consequently direct the respondent Nos. 5 and 6 not to interfere with the peaceful possession and enjoyment of the petitioners’ schedule property without following the due process of law and also direct the respondent No.4 to take appropriate legal action against the respondent Nos. 5 to 7, for misusing their power for their personal gain and to conduct departmental enquiry on the respondent Nos.5 to 7 herein and pass such other order.” 2. During hearing, learned counsel for the petitioners, without touching the merits of the case, requested this Court to issue a direction to the respondents not to interfere with the petitioners’ peaceful possession and enjoyment over the subject property, without following due process of law. 5 3. Learned Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue submits that, if the petitioners are in possession of the subject property, the respondents would follow due process of law. 4. Having regard to the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned Assistant Government Pleader for the respondents, it is observed that when the petitioners are in settled possession and enjoyment of the subject properties, they cannot be dispossessed, without following due process of law in view of the law declared by the Apex Court in “Rame Gowda (dead) by L.Rs. v. M.Varadappa Naidu (Dead) by L.Rs.1”. Therefore, if the petitioners are in possession of the subject property, the respondents are directed not to interfere with the petitioners’ peaceful possession and enjoyment of the subject property, except by following due process of law. 5. With the above direction, the Writ Petition is disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs. As a sequel miscellaneous application, pending, if any, shall also stand closed. ________________________________ VENKATESWARLU NIMMAGADDA, J 1122..0099..22002255 TTPPSS 1 2004 (1) SCC 769 6 174 HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE VENKATESWARLU NIMMAGADDA WRIT PETITION NO:24342 of 2025 1122..0099..22002255 TTPPSS