APHC010023682023 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3332] TUESDAY, THE FOURTH DAY OF NOVEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE RAVI CHEEMALAPATI WRIT PETITION NO: 1191/2023 Between: 1. GARAPATI SIVA CHAITANYA, S/0 VENKATA NAGENDRA PRASAD, 5-24, MAIN ROAD, UPPALAGUPTAM, KONASEEMA DISTRICT AT AMALAPURAM, ANDHRA PRADESH-533222. 2. GARAPATI SIVA BINDU, D/0 VENKATA NAGENDRA PRASAD, 5-24, MAIN ROAD, UPPALAGUPTAM, KONASEEMA DISTRICT AT AMALAPURAM, ANDHRA PRADESH-533222. ...PETITIONER(S) AND 1. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REPRESENTED BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF PANCHAYETI RAJ AND RURAL DEVELOPMENT, A.P. SECRETARIAT, VELAGAPUDI, AMARAVATI, GUNTUR DISTRICT, ANDHRA PRADESH. 2. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REPRESENTED BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE, A.P. SECRETARIAT, VELAGAPUDI, AMARAVATI, GUNTUR DISTRICT. 3. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, DR AMBEDKAR 2 KONASEEMA DISTRICT AT AMALAPURAM, ANDHRA PRADESH. 4. THE REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER OF AMALAPURAM, DR AMBEDKAR KONASEEMA DISTRICT, ANDHRA PRADESH. 5. THE THASILDAR, UPPALAGUPTAM, DR AMBEDKAAR KONASEEMA DISTRICT AT AMALAPURAM, ANDHRA PRADESH. 6. THE GRAMA PANCHYATHI OF UPPALAGUPTAM VILLAGE AND MD, UPPALAGUPTAM MANDAL, DR AMBEDKAR KONASEEMA DISTRICT AT AMALAPURAM, ANDHRA PRADESH. 7. GARAPATI RAJA RAO, S/O SUBBARAO AGED 70 YEARS, UPPALAGUPTAM MD, DR AMBEDKAR KONASEEMA DIST, ANDHRAA PRADESH. ...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 issue a Writ Order or direction particularly, one in the nature of writ of Mandamus declaring action of the 5th and 6th respondent authorits in trying to dispossess the petitioners from their agricultural land to an extent of Ac. 0.48 cents in Survey No. 1055-3 and Ac. 0.72 cents in Survey No. 1056-1 with respect to 1st petitioner and Ac. 2.0 cents in Survey No. 1056-1 with respect to 2nd petitioner situated at Uppalaguptam, Dr Ambedkar Konaseema District at Amalapuram, Andhra Pradesh., without following procedure established by the law as illegal, arbitrary and violation of principles of natural justice and the act of authorities is against the principle laid down by the Hon'ble Apex court in the case of RAME GOWDA V/S M VARADAPPA NAIDU Citation 2003 LawSuit(SC) 1248 as illegal, arbitrary and violation of principles of natural justice and also Article 14,15,16,21 and 300-A of the Constitution of India and consequently direct the respondents not 3 to interfere into the peaceful possession of the subject property of extent of Ac. 0.48 cents in Survey No. 1055-3 and Ac. 0.72 cents in Survey No. 1056-1 with respect to 1st petitioner and Ac. 2.0 cents in Survey No. 1056-1 with respect to 2nd petitioner situated at Uppalaguptam, Konaseema District at Amalapuram, Andhra Pradesh except due process of law and pass 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 direct the respondents not to interfere into the peaceful possession of the subject lands of extent of Ac. 0.48 cents in Survey No. 1055-3 and Ac. 0.72 cents in Survey No. 1056-1 with respect to 1st petitioner and Ac. 2.0 cents in Survey No. 1056-1 with respect to 2nd petitioner situated at Uppalaguptam, Dr Ambedakar Konaseema District at Amalapuram, Andhra Pradesh and pass IA NO: 2 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 vacate the stay order dt.19.01.2023 in WP No. 1191 of 2023 pending disposal, of above writ petition, in the interest of justice and pass Counsel for the Petitioner(S): 1. JADA SRAVAN KUMAR Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. GP FOR REVENUE 2. GP FOR PANCHAYAT RAJ RURAL DEV 3. N SRIHARI (Standing Counsel for ZPP MPP and GRAM PANCHAYAT) 4. VAKATI VENKATA GNANUSHA 4 The Court made the following ORDER: Declaring the action of the respondent authorities in trying to dispossess the petitioners from their agricultural land to an extent of Ac.0.48 cents in Sy.No.1055-3 and Ac.0.72 cents in Sy.No.1056-1 with respect to the 1st petitioner, and Ac.2.0 cents in Sy.No.1056-1 with respect to the 2nd petitioner situated at Amalapuram, Uppalaguptam Mandal, Dr. Ambedkar Konaseema District, without following the due process of law, as illegal and arbitrary, the present writ petition is filed. 2. Heard Ms. Krishna deepthi, learned counsel representing Sri Jada Sravan Kumar, learned counsel for the petitioners, Sri Y. Koteswara Rao, learned Standing Counsel for Gram Panchayat and Ms. Naga Chandrika, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Panchayat Raj. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioners, while reiterating the contents of the affidavits, submitted that when the respondent authorities, without issuing any prior notice and without following the procedure contemplated under law, tried to dispossess the petitioners from their agricultural land, the present writ petition has been filed. This Court, by interim order dated 19.01.2023, directed the respondent authorities not to dispossess the 5 petitioners from the subject property without following the due process of law. She further submitted that the respondent authorities, in their counter affidavit, have categorically stated that they are not interfering with the petitioners’ properties. As such, she requested to record the said submissions and prayed to dispose of the writ petition treating the interim order as final order. 4. Learned Standing Counsel for Gram Panchyat, on counter, submitted that they are not interfering with the petitioners’ property and if they have any intention to acquire the subject land, the same would be done by following the due process of law. As such, prayed to dismiss the writ petition. 5. On perusal of the counter affidavit filed by the respondent No.6, particularly in Para No.5, it is stated that they are not interfering with the petitioners’ property and if they have any intention to acquire the subject land for any public purpose, the same would be done by following the due process of law. As the respondent authorities have an intention to follow law, there is no purpose in keeping the writ petition pending and this Court is inclined to dispose of the writ petition by passing the following order: 6 “The respondent authorities are directed not to interfere or dispossess the petitioners from their agricultural land to an extent of Ac.0.48 cents in Sy.No.1055-3 and Ac.0.72 cents in Sy.No.1056-1 with respect to the 1st petitioner, and Ac.2.0 cents in Sy.No.1056-1 with respect to the 2nd petitioner situated at Amalapuram, Uppalaguptam Mandal, Dr. Ambedkar Konaseema District, except in accordance with law.” 6. Accordingly, the Writ Petition is disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs. As a sequel thereto, interlocutory applications pending, if any in the Writ Petition, shall also stand closed. ___________________________ JUSTICE RAVI CHEEMALAPATI Date: 04.11.2025 ANS 7 285 THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE RAVI CHEEMALAPATI WRIT PETITION NO: 1191/2023 Date: 04.11.2025 ANS