APHC010819852015 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3333] THURSDAY ,THE THIRTEENTH DAY OF FEBRUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE V.SUJATHA WRIT PETITION NO: 3474/2015 Between: New Poorna Theatre, Vizianagaram ...PETITIONER AND State Of Andhra Pradesh Rep By and Others ...RESPONDENT(S) Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. VENKATESWARA RAO GUDAPATI Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. Sireesha Rani Vallabhaneni,Standing Counsel For Municipalities 2. GP-MUNCIPAL ADMN AND URBAN DEV(AP) The Court made the following: ORDER: The present Writ Petition came to be filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking the following relief:- “…to issue an order or direction or writ more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the 2nd respondent authorities in trying to demolish the petitioner's compound wall and ticket sale counters situated at Door No. 7-8-37 in TS No. 932, 934, 945 and 946 admeasuring an extent of 2,208 sq. yards of Vizianagaram without issuing any notice or acquiring the property or without following due process of law is arbitrary, illegal, null and void and against norms of public policy and principles of natural justice and violative of Article 300A of Constitution of India and consequently to direct the respondent authorities not to demolish the structures of the petitioner theatre without following due process of law…” 2. The petitioner herein is the owner and possessor of the ancestral property situated in door No.7-8-37 in T.S.No.932, 934, 945 and 946 admeasuring an extent of 2,208 square yards in Vizianagaram in which, the grandfather of the petitioner has constructed ‘New Poorna Theatre’ which is currently being run by the petitioner herein after obtaining requisite license from the concerned. In the said premises, a ticket sale counter was constructed along with the compound wall. The grievance of the petitioners is that the 2nd respondent, in order to widen the road, is trying to demolish the said ticket sale counter constructed along with the compound wall without issuing any notice and without following the due process of law. Aggrieved by the same, the petitioner has filed the present petition. 3. When the writ petition came up for hearing on 18.01.2015, this Court has directed both the parties to maintain status quo existing as on that day. 4. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned Government Pleader for Municipal Administration and Urban Development and Mrs. Sireesha Rani Vallabhaneni, learned Standing Counsel for the 2nd respondent. 5. During the course of arguments, learned Standing Counsel on instructions has submitted that the respondent authorities have not tried to demolish the petitioner’s property and if they intend to do so, they would follow due process of law contemplated under law. 6. Admittedly, the petitioner is in possession and enjoyment of the subject property. When the petitioner is in settled possession and enjoyment of the property, he 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.R.s. v. M. Varadappa Naidu (Dead) by L.Rs1. 7. In view of the above, this Court feels it appropriate to dispose of the writ petition by directing the respondent authorities not to demolish the petitioner’s compound wall and ticket sale counter situated at door No.7-8-37 in TS.No.932, 934, 945 and 946 of Vizianagaram, without following due process of law. 8. Accordingly, with the above direction, this writ petition is disposed of. No costs. As a sequel thereto, miscellaneous petitions, if any, shall stand closed. ________________________ JUSTICE V.SUJATHA Date:13.02.2025 Gss 1 2004 (1) SCC 769