APHC010577192025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3208] WEDNESDAY, THE NINETEENTH DAY OF NOVEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE D RAMESH WRIT PETITION NO: 29691/2025 Between: 1. S MUNEMMA, W/O. S. SREERAMULU, AGED ABOUT 52 YEAIRS, OCC. DAILY WAGE LABOUR, R/O. DAMINEEDU VILLAGE, TIRUCHANOOR POST, TIRUPATHI RURAL MANDAL, TIRUPATI DISTRICT. 2. TIRUPATHI PUTTAMMA,, W/O. T. SREENIVASULU, AGED ABOUT 42 YEARS, OCC. DAILY WAGE LABOUR, R/O. DAMINEEDU VILLAGE, TIRUCHANOOR POST, TIRUPATHI RURAL MANDAL, TIRUPATI DISTRICT. 3. DEVALLA SUBBAMMA,, W/O. DEVALLA PENCHALAIAH, AGED ABOUT 48 YEARS, OCC. DAILY WAGE LABOUR, R/O. DAMINEEDU VILLAGE, TIRUCHANOOR POST, TIRUPATHI RURAL MANDAL, TIRUPATI DISTRICT. 4. PANCHETI VENKATA KRESHNAIAH,, S/O. P. RAMANUJAIAH AGED ABOUT 52 YEARS, OCC. DAILY WAGE LABOUR, R/O. DAMINEEDU VILLAGE, TIRUCHANOOR POST, TIRUPATHI RURAL MANDAL, TIRUPATI DISTRICT. 5. KUNCHALA ESWARAIAH,, S/O. K. VENKATAIAH, AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS, OCC. DAILY WAGE LABOUR, R/O. DAMINEEDU VILLAGE, TIRUCHANOOR POST, TIRUPATHI RURAL MANDAL, TIRUPATI DISTRICT. 6. PUNABAKAM SWETHA,, W/O. P. SURESH BABU, AGED ABOUT 35 YEARS, OCC. DAILY WAGE LABOUR, R/O. DAMINEEDU VILLAGE, TIRUCHANOOR POST, TIRUPATHI RURAL MANDAL, TIRUPATI DISTRICT. 7. K. ANANTHALAKSHMI,, W/O. K.RAMA RAO, AGED ABOUT 39 YEARS, OCC. DAILY WAGE LABOUR, R/O. DAMINEEDU 2 VILLAGE, TIRUCHANOOR POST, TIRUPATHI RURAL MANDAL, TIRUPATI DISTRICT. 8. K. JAYANTHI,, W/O. MUNI KRISHNA, AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS, OCC. DAILY WAGE LABOUR, R/O. DAMINEEDU VILLAGE, TIRUCHANOOR POST, TIRUPATHI RURAL MANDAL, TIRUPATI DISTRICT. 9. KUNTRAPAKAM BHARGAV,, S/O. KUNTRAPAKAM MUNI SUBRAMANAYAM, AGED ABOUT 34 YEARS, OCC. DAILY WAGE LABOUR, R/O. DAMINEEDU VILLAGE, TIRUCHANOOR POST, TIRUPATHI RURAL MANDAL, TIRUPATI DISTRICT 10. P.DAYANIDHI,, S/O. LATE P. RAGHUPATHI, AGED ABOUT 47 YEARS, OCC. DAILY WAGE LABOUR, R/O. DAMINEEDU VILLAGE, TIRUCHANOOR POST, TIRUPATHI RURAL MANDAL, TIRUPATI DISTRICT. 11. REDDYLAKSHMI BANDLA,, D/O. B. VENKATA RAMANA, AGED ABOUT 35 YEARS, OCC. DAILY WAGE LABOUR, R/O. DAMINEEDU VILLAGE, TIRUCHANOOR POST, TIRUPATHI RURAL MANDAL, TIRUPATI DISTRICT. 12. A. RAMESWARI,, W/O. A. DEVADASU, AGED ABOUT 53 YEARS, OCC. DAILY WAGE LABOUR, R/O. DAMINEEDU VILLAGE, TIRUCHANOOR POST, TIRUPATHI RURAL MANDAL, TIRUPATI DISTRICT. 13. G. LAKSHMI,, W/O. GUMMADI CHANDRA, AGED ABOUT 43 YEARS, OCC. DAILY WAGE LABOUR, R/O. DAMINEEDU VILLAGE, TIRUCHANOOR POST, TIRUPATHI RURAL MANDAL, TIRUPATI DISTRICT. 14. N.PADMAVATHI,, W/O. N.SATHAIAH, AGED ABOUT 54 YEARS, OCC. DAILY WAGE LABOUR, R/O. DAMINEEDU VILLAGE, TIRUCHANOOR POST, TIRUPATHI RURAL MANDAL, TIRUPATI DISTRICT. 15. A. SEETHAMMA,, W/O. A.S RAMANJANEYULU. AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS, OCC. DAILY WAGE LABOUR R/O. DAMINEEDU VILLAGE, TIRUCHANOOR POST, TIRUPATHI RURAL MANDAL, TIRUPATI DISTRICT. 16. I KUTTUY LOKESH,, S/O. 1. DORASWAMY, AGED ABOUT 52 YEARS, OCC. DAILY WAGE LABOUR, R/O. DAMINEEDU VILLAGE, TIRUCHANOOR POST, TIRUPATHI RURAL MANDAL, CHITTOOR DISTRICT. ...PETITIONER(S) AND 3 1. THE STATE OF AP, REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, REVENUE DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT, VELAGAPUDI, AMARAVATI, GUNTUR DISTRICT. 2. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, TIRUPATI DISTRICT AT TIRUPATI. 3. THE REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER, TIRUPATI DIVISION, TIRUPATI DISTRICT. 4. THE TAHSILDAR, TIRUPATHI RURAL MANDAL, TIRUPATI 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 to issue a writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of WRIT OF MANDAMUS declaring the action of the respondents in resorting to evict the petitioners from their residential houses plots No. 1 to 15 and 17 respectively and same was situated in Survey No. 49/6 of Damineedu Village account in Tirupathi Rural Mandal of Tirupati District, without issuing any notice to petitioners, nor following any process of law and declare the same as high handedly, illegal, arbitraiy and unconstitutional and Contrary to the settle principle of law apart from violation of principles of natural Justice by setting aside the same 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 to direct the 4th Respondent or his subordinates or his office staff not to interfere with the petitioners peaceful possession and enjoyment in respect of their residential houses plots No. 1 to 15 and 17 respectively and same was situated in Survey No. 49/6 of Damineedu Village account in Tirupathi Rural Mandal of Tirupati District, in the interest of Justice in pending disposal of the main Writ Petition and pass Counsel for the Petitioner(S): 1. MUCHAKAYALA NARAYANA Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. GP FOR REVENUE The Court made the following: 4 ORDER: The present Writ Petition is filed, under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, seeking the following relief: “to issue any writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus or an appropriate writ or order declaring the action of the respondents in resorting to evict the petitioners from their residential houses plots No. 1 to 15 and 17 respectively and same was situated in Survey No. 49/6 of Damineedu Village account in Tirupathi Rural Mandal of Tirupati District, without issuing any notice to petitioners, nor following any process of law and declare the same as high handedly, illegal, arbitrary and unconstitutional and Contrary to the settle principle of law apart from violation of principles of natural Justice by setting aside the same pass or orders….” 2. Heard M/s. M.Narayana, learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned Assistant Government Pleader for the respondents. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioners submit that the respondents are trying to dispossess the petitioners from their residential house plots i.e. Plot Nos.1 to 15 and 17 in Sy.No.49/6 of Damineedu Village account in Tirupati Rural Mandal of Tirupati District without following due process of law. Hence, the Writ Petition. 4. On the other hand, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue submitted the written instructions dated 30.10.2025 issued by respondent no.4/the Tahsildar, Tirupati Rural Mandal, wherein it is stated that the land in Sy.No.49/6 of Daminedu Revenue Village admeasuring Ac.0.66 cents is a Government land with tiny trees and bushes. 5 5. He further submitted that the petitioners or any others are never been in possession and encroachment of the land and the alleged disturbance of the purported possession of the petitioners do not arise. He further submits that if any encroachment found over the subject property, the respondent authorities will initiate action against the writ petitioners by following due process of law in terms of A.P.land Encroachment Act, 1905. 6. Having regard to the submissions made by the learned counsel for both the parties, it is settled proposition of law that if the respondents are intended to make any developments through the petitioners property, they are under the obligation to follow due procedure as contemplated under the law. 7. With the above said direction, the Writ Petition is disposed of. No costs. As a sequel thereto, interlocutory applications pending, if any, in the writ petition, shall also stand closed. ___________________ JUSTICE D.RAMESH 19.11.2025 RD 6 THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE D.RAMESH WRIT PETITION NO.29691 OF 2025 19.11.2025 RD