APHC010415032021 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3233] THURSDAY,THE FOURTH DAY OF DECEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE B KRISHNA MOHAN WRIT PETITION NO: 25470/2021 Between: 1. POLINENI SRINIVASULU, S/O LATE SUBBAYYA, AGED ABOUT 66YRS, OCC. CARPENTER,R/O D.NO. 1-5/129, SIVALAYAM STREET, NEAR OLD BUS STAND, PODALAKURU VILLAGE, PODALAKURU MANDAL, S.P.S NELLORE DISTRICT. ...PETITIONER AND 1. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REPRESENTED BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, REVENUE DEPARTMENT, VELAGAPUDI AT AMARAVATHI, GUNTUR DISTRICT. 2. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REPRESENTED BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, PANCHAYATRAJ AND RURAL DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT, VELAGAPUDI AT AMARAVATHI, GUNTUR DISTRICT. 3. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, S.P.S. NELLORE DISTRICT AT NELLORE. 4. THE REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER, NELLORE, AT S.P.S NELLORE DISTRICT. 5. THE TAHSILDAR, PODALAKURU MANDAL, AT PODALAKURU, S.P.S NELLORE DISTRICT. 6. THE PODALAKURU GRAMA PANCHAYAT, REP BY ITS PANCHAYAT SECRETARY, PODALAKURU GRAMA PANCHYAT, AT PODALAKURU VILLAGE AND MANDAL, S.P.S NELLORE 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 2 pleased tomay be pleased to issue a Writ or order or direction more particularly one in the nature of WRIT OF MANDAMUS declaring the action of the Respondents particularly Respondent No. 5 and 6 in interfering with the Petitioners peaceful possession and enjoyment of the land and the shops made therein situated at Survey No. 188/C1 of Podalakuru village, Podalakuru Mandal, S.P.S Nellore district in an extent of 0.05 cents allotted to the petitioner vide F.Dis.1172/PS/12, dated 01.12.2012 by the Respondent No. 5 and despite the proceedings vide D.Dis.(H).940/2015, dated 18.04.2017 issued by the Respondent No. 4 declaring that the Petitioner is not an encroacher and the land absolutely belongs to the Petitioner as, nothing but illegal, arbitrary, erroneous, high handed and violative of Article 21 and 300A of The Constitution of India and consequently direct the Respondents not to interfere with the Petitioner's peaceful possession and enjoyment of the land situated at 188/Cl of Podalakuru village, Podalakuru Mandal, S.P.S Nellore district and pass such IA NO: 1 OF 2021 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 may be pleased to direct the Respondents not to interfere with the Petitioner's peaceful possession and enjoyment of the land situated at Survey No. 188/C1 of Podalakuru village, Podalakuru Mandal, S.P.S Nellore district pending disposal of the above writ petition and pass such IA NO: 1 OF 2023 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 permit petitioner to amend the prayer portion of the writ petition as " 0.10 Cents" in the place of " 0.05 Cents" 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 may be pleased to vacate the order dated 02.11.2021 passed orders in W.P No. 25470 of 2021 in the interest of justice and pass Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. AMANCHARLA SATISH BABU Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. VENKATA REDDY GAJJALA SC FOR ZPP, MPP, AND GRAM PANCHAYAT 3 2. GP FOR REVENUE 4 The Court made the following ORDER: Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner, the learned Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue appearing for the respondent Nos.1, 3 to 5 and the learned Standing Counsel appearing for the respondent No.6. 2. This Writ Petition was filed questioning the action of the respondent Nos.5 and 6 in interfering with the petitioner’s peaceful possession and enjoyment of the land and the shops made therein situated in Sy.No.188/C1 of Podalakuru Village, Podalakuru Mandal, S.P.S. Nellore District in an extent of Ac.0.05 cents allotted to the petitioner vide F.Dis.1172/PS/12, dated 01.12.2012 by the respondent No.5 and despite the proceedings vide D.Dis.(H).940/2015, dated 18.04.2017 issued by the respondent No.4 declaring that the petitioner is not an encroacher and the land absolutely belongs to the petitioner. 3. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the 5th respondent issued a certificate dated 18.01.2013, stating that, since the petitioner along with others were removed from Sy.No.13 for the purpose of construction of Shiridi Sai Baba Mandir, the 6th respondent allotted an extent of Ac.0.05 cents in Sy.No.188/C1 and pattas were also granted and the building plan was also approved vide resolution No.117, B.A.No.20 dated 31.10.1985 of the 6th respondent-Gram Panchayat and possession certificate dated 18.01.2013 was also issued in the year 2012 by the Gram Panchayat. The 5th respondent in the said certificate certified that the subject land is not an assigned land. 5 4. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner also refers to the proceedings of the 4th respondent dated 18.04.2017, wherein, the appeal of the petitioner was allowed by setting aside the notices issued by the 5th respondent under Sections 7 and 6 of the Land Encroachment Act, 1905. The 4th respondent further observed in the said proceedings dated 18.04.2017 that if the Gram Panchayat desires the site of the appellant therein/ petitioner herein, situated in Sy.No.188/C1, of Podalakuru Village, the panchayat can acquire the same under the provisions of the Land Encroachment Act. 5. The learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that when the petitioner is in peaceful possession and enjoyment of the subject land, the respondent Nos.5 and 6 are again trying to dispossess him without following any due procedure. 6. On the other hand, the learned Standing Counsel appearing for the 6th respondent, relying upon the counter affidavit of the 6th respondent submits that as per the report of the 5th respondent dated 19.06.2017, the petitioner occupied ‘Mandabylu’ (Grazing Land) and applied for conversion to the 5th respondent and the same was rejected by the 5th respondent and there are structures existing for the last 15 years as per the report of the 5th respondent and it is not an agricultural land as per the Diglot as it is classified as ‘Mandabylu’ (Grazing Land) Poramboke land. The 5th respondent has no right to grant any possession certificate for the subject extent of Ac.0.05 cents in Sy.No.188-C1 as it was classified as ‘Mandabylu’, poramboke land and 6 nobody has got any authority to grant possession certificate except the Gram Panchayat. As per the G.O.Ms.No.188, dated 28.07.2011, the Gram Panchayat has got the authority to deal with the encroachers when the property of the Gram Panchayat is under any illegal occupation. 7. In view of the above said facts and circumstances and upon consideration of the rival submissions made, prima-facie, it appears that the petitioner is not under any illegal possession of the subject land, as the above said documents referred, reveals that the concerned Gram Panchayat passed resolutions for allotment of the subject site and permission for construction of building therein by the Gram Panchayat, which are not disputed by the learned Standing Counsel for the 6th respondent except referring to the averment of the 6th respondent in its counter affidavit, as if the petitioner was an encroacher and is in illegal possession of the subject property and with respect to taking any action by the Gram Panchayat as against any encroacher, it is not clear even from the averments of the counter affidavit of the 6th respondent that the petitioner encroached upon the Gram Panchayat’s land, without there being any valid documents in his favour. 8. Be that as it may, if the 6th respondent intends to proceed with the subject land, if so warranted for any public purpose, it can be dealt with by following the due procedure only. Since the petitioner is in possession of the same, he shall be dealt with strictly in accordance with law by hearing all the parities’ concerned, including the petitioner upon verification of the records and the subject land, appropriate decision can be taken on its own merits. 7 Any dispossession from the subject land shall not be made except by following the due process of law. 9. Accordingly, the Writ Petition is disposed of. Interim order, if any, deemed to have been vacated. There shall be no order as to costs. As a sequel, Interlocutory Applications pending, if any, shall stand closed. __________________________ JUSTICE B KRISHNA MOHAN 04.12.2025 SCH 8 160 THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE B. KRISHNA MOHAN W.P.No.25470 of 2021 Date: 04.12.2025 SCH