APHC010473672025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3329] FRIDAY,THE NINETEENTH DAY OF SEPTEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE VENKATESWARLU NIMMAGADDA WRIT PETITION NO: 25419/2025 Between: 1. DAGGUPALLI VASANTHI MANASA DEVI, N ...PETITIONER AND 1. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, V ...RESPONDENT 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 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 suspend the operation of the Notice dated 01.08.2025 under section 7 of the Andhra Pradesh Land Encroachment Act III of 1905 issued by the Respondent No.3, forthwith, pending disposal of the above Writ Petition and pass s Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. A RADHAKRISHNA Counsel for the Respondent: 1. The Court made the following: 2 THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE VENKATESWARLU NIMMAGADDA WRIT PETITION NO: 25419/2025 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 5th respondent/Tahsildar in interfering with the petitioner’s peaceful possession and attempting to demolish the petitioner’s property in Visakhapatnam District, Payakaraopeta Mandal, Nakkapalli Sub-Registrar Office Limits, within the jurisdiction of Payakaraopeta Panchayat, at Payakaraopeta Village, 1st ward, Raju Garibidu, near D.No.1-25, out of land in Sy.Nos.175 and 176, which was divided into house sites (plots) and approve3d by Payakaraopeta Panchayat under layout approval No.167/84 dated 24.12.1984 and layout approval No.26/85 dated 17.01.1985, plot No.62, admeasuring an extent of 104.88 sq. yards (equivalent to 87.469 Sq. meters) type : vacant residential site without following due process of law, respondents not to demolish or interfere with the petitioner’s peaceful possession and enjoyment of the petition schedule property admeasuring 104.88 Sq. yards, situated at Payakaraopeta Village and Mandal, Visakhapatnam District and pass such other order.” 2. During hearing, learned counsel for the petitioner, without touching the merits of the case, requested this Court to issue a direction to the respondents not to demolish or interfere with the petitioner’s peaceful possession and enjoyment of the subject property, without following due process of law. 3 3. Learned Government Pleader for the respondents submits that, if the petitioner is 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 petitioner and the learned Government Pleader for the respondents, it is observed that when the petitioner is in settled possession and enjoyment of the subject properties, she 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 petitioner is in possession of the subject property, the respondents are directed not to demolish or interfere with the petitioner’s 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 1199..0099..22002255 TTPPSS 1 2004 (1) SCC 769 4 530 HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE VENKATESWARLU NIMMAGADDA WRIT PETITION NO:25419 of 2025 1199..0099..22002255 TTPPSS