APHC010075452023 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH THURSDAY,THE SIXTH DAY OF NOVEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE RAVI CHEEMALAPATI WRIT PETITION NO: 3753/2023 Between: 1. K RAVANAMMA, W/O K RAMAIAH AGED 52 YEARS, R/O CHERIVI VILLAGE, SATYAVEDU MANDAL, TIRUPATHI DISTRICT. 1. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, PANCHAYATRAJ DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT BUILDINGS, AMARAVATHI, GUNTUR DIST. 2. THE DISTRICT PANCHAYAT OFFICER, TLRUPATHL, TIRUPATHI DISTRICT. 3. CHERIVI GRAM PANCHAYAT, REP BY ITS PANCHAYAT SECRETARY CHERIVI VILLAGE, SATYAVEDU MANDAL, TIRUPATHI DISTRICT. 4. THE TAHSILDAR, SATYAVEDU, SATYAVEDU MANDAL, DISTRICT. 5. C SEENAIAH, S/O ANKAIAH, AGED 45 YEARS, R/O CHERIVI VILLAGE, SATYAVEDU MANDAL, TIRUPATHI DISTRICT. 6. A PACHAPPA, S/O KRISHNAMACHARY, AGED 40 YEARS, CHERIVI VILLAGE, SATYAVEDU MANDAL, TIRUPATHI DISTRICT. 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 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) THURSDAY,THE SIXTH DAY OF NOVEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE RAVI CHEEMALAPATI WRIT PETITION NO: 3753/2023 K RAVANAMMA, W/O K RAMAIAH AGED 52 YEARS, R/O CHERIVI VILLAGE, SATYAVEDU MANDAL, TIRUPATHI DISTRICT. ...PETITIONER AND THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, PANCHAYATRAJ DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT AMARAVATHI, GUNTUR DIST. THE DISTRICT PANCHAYAT OFFICER, TLRUPATHL, TIRUPATHI CHERIVI GRAM PANCHAYAT, REP BY ITS PANCHAYAT SECRETARY CHERIVI VILLAGE, SATYAVEDU MANDAL, TIRUPATHI THE TAHSILDAR, SATYAVEDU, SATYAVEDU MANDAL, C SEENAIAH, S/O ANKAIAH, AGED 45 YEARS, R/O CHERIVI VILLAGE, SATYAVEDU MANDAL, TIRUPATHI DISTRICT. A PACHAPPA, S/O KRISHNAMACHARY, AGED 40 YEARS, CHERIVI VILLAGE, SATYAVEDU MANDAL, TIRUPATHI 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 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH [3332] THURSDAY,THE SIXTH DAY OF NOVEMBER THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE RAVI CHEEMALAPATI K RAVANAMMA, W/O K RAMAIAH AGED 52 YEARS, R/O CHERIVI VILLAGE, SATYAVEDU MANDAL, TIRUPATHI DISTRICT. ...PETITIONER THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, PANCHAYATRAJ DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT THE DISTRICT PANCHAYAT OFFICER, TLRUPATHL, TIRUPATHI CHERIVI GRAM PANCHAYAT, REP BY ITS PANCHAYAT SECRETARY CHERIVI VILLAGE, SATYAVEDU MANDAL, TIRUPATHI THE TAHSILDAR, SATYAVEDU, SATYAVEDU MANDAL, TIRUPATHI C SEENAIAH, S/O ANKAIAH, AGED 45 YEARS, R/O CHERIVI VILLAGE, SATYAVEDU MANDAL, TIRUPATHI DISTRICT. A PACHAPPA, S/O KRISHNAMACHARY, AGED 40 YEARS, CHERIVI VILLAGE, SATYAVEDU MANDAL, TIRUPATHI 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 any writ, order or direction, preferably a writ in the nature of Mandamus declaring the action of the respondents 3 and 4 in trying to forcibly dispossess the petitioner from land admeasuring an extent of Ac0.11cents in Sy.No.572/1 situated in Cherivi Village, Satyavedu Mandal, Tirupathi District as illegal, arbitrary, Violative of principles of Natural Justice and also Violative of Ariticles 14, 21 and 300 - A of the Costitution of India and consequently direct the respondents 3 and 4 not to dispossess the petitioner from land admeasuring an extent of Ac0.11cents in SyNo.572/1 situated in Cherivi Village, Satyavedu Mandal, Tirupathi District and to 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 to direct the respondents 3 and 4 not to dispossess the petitioner from land admeasuring an extent of Ac0.11cents in SyNo.572/1 situated in Cherivi Village, Satyavedu Mandal, Tirupathi District pending disposal of the above writ petition and to pass such other order or orders may deem fit and proper in the circumstances of the case. pending disposal of the above writ petition and to pass Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. V VINOD K REDDY Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. VENKATA REDDY GAJJALA SC FOR ZPP, MPP, AND GRAM PANCHAYAT 2. GP FOR REVENUE 3. GP FOR PANCHAYAT RAJ RURAL DEV The Court made the following: ORDER: Declaring the action of respondent Nos.3 & 4 in trying to dispossess the petitioner from the land to an extent of Ac.0.11 cents in Sy.No.572/1 situated in Cherivi Village, Satyavedu Mandal, Tirupathi District, without following law, the present writ petition is filed. 2. Heard SriR.Laxmikar, learned counsel representing SriV.Vinod K Reddy, learned counsel for the petitioner, Sri M.Sudheer, learned Standing Counsel for Gram Panchayat, Ms.Naga Chandrika, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Panchayat Raj and learned Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue for the respondents. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner while reiterating the contents of the affidavit contended that the petitioneris the absolute owner and possessor of the subject land. While so, respondent Nos.3 & 4 under the influence of respondent Nos.5 & 6 are trying to dispossess the petitioner from the subject property stating that the said land was classified as Grama Kantam. He further submitted that irrespective of the fact that the land is Gram Kantam or dotted land, neither the state nor respondent No.3 has any right over the same and the said proposition is settled by this Court in umpteen number of cases. He further submitted that on 15.02.2023, this Court, has granted interim order protecting the interest of the petitioner, accordingly, prayed to pass appropriate orders protecting the interest of the petitioner. 4. On the other hand, learned Standing Counsel on counter contended that the Gram Panchayat is not interfering with the subject property of the petitioner and in the event if it wants to interfere in the future, they would follow due process of law. 5. Learned Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue on counter contended that the possession certificate dated 16.09.2015 issued by the Panchayat Secretary, Cherivi Gram Panchayat, Satyavedu Mandal, is not genuine. The Panchayat Secretary is not competent to grant possession certificates thereby disputed the possession of the petitioner.He further contended that the petitioner only with an intention to mislead this Court has filed the present writ petition and this Court cannot show any indulgence on the petitioner. The writ petition is devoid of merits and liable to be dismissed accordingly, prayed to dismiss the writ petition. 6. Perused the record and considered the submissions made by the learned counsel. 7. Admittedly, the subject land is classified as Grama Kantam land. A perusal of the counter filed by respondent No.3 would go to show that the said land was classified as grama kantam and they are not interfering with the possession of the petitioner. Further, in the event, they want to interfere they would follow due process. In view of the classification of the land as Grama Kantam, the revenue officials has no role to interfere with the subject land. However, this Court is not inclined to adjudicate as to whether the possession certificate relied by the petitioner is genuine or not. As such, without going into the merits and demerits of the matter, as the Grampanchayat has admitted that the petitioner is in possession of the property, this Court is inclined to dispose of the writ petition by passing the following order: “The respondents are directed not to interfere with the subject property except under due process of law.” 8. Accordingly, the Writ Petition is disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs. As a sequel, miscellaneous applications, pending if any, shall stand closed. _____________________________ JUSTICE RAVI CHEEMALAPATI Date: 06th November, 2025 RKS