APHC010103292020 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3233] WEDNESDAY,THE THIRD DAY OF DECEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE B KRISHNA MOHAN WRIT PETITION NO: 6354/2020 Between: 1. S. NARASINGA RAO,, S/O. LATE RAMULU, AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS, R/O. GONTHINAVANIPALEM, GAJUVAKA, GAJUVAKA MANDAL, VISAKHAPATNAM DISTRICT, A.P. 2. S. RAMA RAO,, S/O. LATE RAMULU, AGED ABOUT 52 YEARS, R/O. GONTHINAVANIPALEM, GAJUVAKA, GAJUVAKA MANDAL, VISAKHAPATNAM DISTRICT, A.P. 3. S. APPAIA RAJU,, S/O. LATE RAMULU, AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS, R/O. GONTHINAVANIPALEM, GAJUVAKA, GAJUVAKA MANDAL, VISAKHAPATNAM DISTRICT, A.P. 4. S. SREENIVASA RAO,, S/O. LATE RAMULU, AGED ABOUT 48 YEARS, R/O. GONTHINAVANIPALEM, GAJUVAKA, GAJUVAKA MANDAL, VISAKHAPATNAM DISTRICT, A.P ...PETITIONER(S) AND 1. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, REVENUE DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT BUILDINGS, VELAGAPUDI, GUNTUR DISTRICT, A.P. 2. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, VISAKHAPATNAM DISTRICT, VISAKHAPATNAM. 3. THE REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER, VISAKHAPATNAM DISTRICT, VISAKHAPATNAM. 2 HBKM,J W.P.No.6354 of 2020 4. THE TAHSILDAR, KASIMKOTA 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 toto issue an order or direction or writ, more specifically one in the nature of a writ of mandamus, declaring the action of the respondents in attempting and encroaching in to the property belonging to petitioners of an extent of Ac.O-37 cents in Sy.No. 91 situated at Kasimkota Village and Mandal, Visakhapatnam District as illegal, arbitrary and unconstitutional and also violative of principles of natural justice and consequently direct the respondents not to dispossess the petitioners from an extent of Ac.0.37 cents situated in Sy.No. 91 situated at Kasimkota Village and Mandal, Visakhapatnam District and pass such other order or further orders as a deemed fit and proper in the circumstances of the case and to pass IA NO: 1 OF 2020 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 to direct the respondents not to dispossess the petitioners from an extent of Ac.0.37 cents situated in Sy.No. 91 situated at Kasimkota Village and Mandal, Visakhapatnam District and pass such other order or further orders as a deemed fit and proper in the circumstances of the case pending disposal of the above writ petition and to pass Counsel for the Petitioner(S): 1. K SAIRAM MURTHY Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. GP FOR REVENUE (AP) 3 HBKM,J W.P.No.6354 of 2020 The Court made the following Order: Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned Assistant Government Pleader for the respondents. 2. This writ petition was filed questioning the action of the respondents in attempting to encroach into the property belonging to the petitioners for an extent of Ac.0.37 cents in Sy.No.91 situated at Kasimkota Village and Mandal, Visakhapatnam District. 3. The learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioners are in possession of the subject land to an extent of Ac.0.37 cents in Sy.No.91 situated at Kasimkota Village and Mandal, Visakhapatnam District to the East of Sy.No.91, in which the petitioners’ land is situated, there is a Masjid, but in the Settlement Fasli register issued in the year 2018, it was changed into Masjid for total extent of Ac.1.00 cents. She further submits that in the entire one acre of land in Sy.No.91, there is no Masjid and out of it, as stated above, they are in possession of the property in an extent of Ac.0.37 cents. 4. On the other hand, the learned Assistant Government Pleader relying upon the written instructions of the 4th respondent dated 20.11.2025 submits that as verified from the Settlement Fair Adangal of Kasimkota Village, the Sy.No.91 to an extent of Ac.1.00 cents is classified as Poramboke and in the remarks column it was recorded as “Masjid”. The Village Web land adangal also discloses the existence of Masjid to an extent of Ac.1.00 cents in 4 HBKM,J W.P.No.6354 of 2020 Sy.No.91. As verified from the registered documents Nos.1379 of 1995 dated 06.05.1995, executed by Talari Bullemma W/o Late Ramulu in favour of Budha Lalitha S/o Bhagavan of Anakapalli, the schedule in the document is Ac.0.34 cents in Sy.No.91/1, Ac.0.04 cents in Sy.No.91/2, Ac.0.02 cents in Sy.No.91/3 and Ac.0.13 cents in Sy.No.91/1 in total an extent of Ac.0.53 cents in Sy.No.91. Further, Vide document No.1724/2005, Sri Sirasapalli Ramulu S/o Adiyya purchased an extent of Ac.4.65 cents, out of which, no extent from Sy.No.91 of Kasimkota was purchased. 5. In view of the above said facts and circumstances and upon consideration of the rival submissions made, no relief can be granted in this writ petition as the revenue records disclose the existence of Masjid in an extent of Ac.1.00 cents in Sy.No.91 of Kasimkota Village and Mandal, Visakhapatnam District and as it is not made out prima facie, even title and possession of the petitioners over the subject land. However, as it involves disputed questions of facts on merits, this Court is not inclined to go into it and the petitioners are permitted to establish their possession and title, if any, over the subject extent by approaching the competent Civil Court in accordance with law, if so warranted and if so advised. The written instructions of the 4th respondent dated 20.11.2025 shall be made as part of the Court record. 6. Accordingly, this Writ Petition is disposed of. Interim order if any deemed to have been vacated. There shall be no order as to costs. 5 HBKM,J W.P.No.6354 of 2020 As a sequel, Interlocutory Applications pending, if any, shall stand closed. __________________________ JUSTICE B. KRISHNA MOHAN 03.12.2025 PGT