Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Andhra Pradesh · body

2025 DAILYLAW 42618 (AP)

KONDETI GANGADHARA RAO v. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH

WP/31857/2025 · 2025-11-17

D Ramesh

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

APHC010612942025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH (Special Original Jurisdiction) TUESDAY,THE EIGHTEENTH DAY OF NOVEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE D RAMESH WRIT PETITION NO: 31857/2025 Between: 1. KONDETI GANGADHARA RAO, S/O K.POTHU RAJU, AGED ABOUT 59 YEARS OCC. AGRICULTURE, R/O GOPANNAPALAM, DENDULURU MANDAL, WEST GODAVARI DISTRICT 2. SINGULURI MUSALAYYA, S/O SUBBA RAO AGED ABOUT 62 YEARS OCC. AGRICULTURE, R/O GOPANNAPALAM, MANDAL, WEST GODAVARI DISTRICT 1. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE, 4TH BLOCK, GROUND FLOOR, ROOM NO 135, A.P SECRETARIAT OFFICE, VELAGAPUDI, AMARAVATHI, GUNTUR DISTR 2. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, ELURU, ELURU DISTRICT, ANDHRA PRADESH 3. THE REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER, DENDULURU MANDAL, ELURU DISTRICT, ANDHRA PRADESH 4. THE TAHSILDAR, GOPANNAPLAM VILLAGE, DENDULURU MANDAL ELURU DISTRICT, ANDHRA 5. CHALASANI SRIDHAR, S/O. CHALASANI VENKATESWARA RAO, AGED ABOUT 56 YEARS R/O.GOPANNAPALEMVILLAGE, DENDULURU MANDAL, ELURU DISTRICT, ANDHRA PRADESH 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) TUESDAY,THE EIGHTEENTH DAY OF NOVEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE D RAMESH WRIT PETITION NO: 31857/2025 KONDETI GANGADHARA RAO, S/O K.POTHU RAJU, AGED ABOUT 59 YEARS OCC. AGRICULTURE, R/O GOPANNAPALAM, DENDULURU MANDAL, WEST GODAVARI DISTRICT SINGULURI MUSALAYYA, S/O SUBBA RAO AGED ABOUT 62 YEARS OCC. AGRICULTURE, R/O GOPANNAPALAM, DENDULURU MANDAL, WEST GODAVARI DISTRICT ...PETITIONER(S) AND THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE, 4TH BLOCK, GROUND FLOOR, ROOM NO 135, A.P SECRETARIAT OFFICE, VELAGAPUDI, AMARAVATHI, GUNTUR DISTRICT, ANDHRA PRADESH. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, ELURU, ELURU DISTRICT, ANDHRA THE REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER, DENDULURU MANDAL, ELURU DISTRICT, ANDHRA PRADESH THE TAHSILDAR, GOPANNAPLAM VILLAGE, DENDULURU MANDAL ELURU DISTRICT, ANDHRA PRADESH CHALASANI SRIDHAR, S/O. CHALASANI VENKATESWARA RAO, AGED ABOUT 56 YEARS R/O.GOPANNAPALEMVILLAGE, DENDULURU MANDAL, ELURU DISTRICT, ANDHRA PRADESH IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH [3208] KONDETI GANGADHARA RAO, S/O K.POTHU RAJU, AGED ABOUT 59 YEARS OCC. AGRICULTURE, R/O GOPANNAPALAM, SINGULURI MUSALAYYA, S/O SUBBA RAO AGED ABOUT 62 DENDULURU ...PETITIONER(S) THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE, 4TH BLOCK, GROUND FLOOR, ROOM NO 135, A.P SECRETARIAT OFFICE, VELAGAPUDI, THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, ELURU, ELURU DISTRICT, ANDHRA THE REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER, DENDULURU MANDAL, THE TAHSILDAR, GOPANNAPLAM VILLAGE, DENDULURU MANDAL CHALASANI SRIDHAR, S/O. CHALASANI VENKATESWARA RAO, AGED ABOUT 56 YEARS R/O.GOPANNAPALEMVILLAGE, DENDULURU MANDAL, ELURU DISTRICT, ANDHRA PRADESH 2 ...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 an order or direction more particularly in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the 4th respondent in issuing the impugned notice vide Ref.No.158/2025/A dated 25-10-2025, despite the fact of adjudication by this Honble High Court vide order dated 05.12.2022 in WP. No.29633 of 2015 on the same grounds of alleged encroachment by the petitioners on the subject lands adm. Ac 1.74 cents covered by RS.No.266/6 of Gopannapalem Village, Dendaluru Mandal as illegal arbitrary and violation of Article 14, 16,21 and 300-A of constitution of India as well as principles of Natural justice. Consequently, set aside the impugned notice vide Ref.No.158/2025/A dated 25-10-2025 passed by 4th respondent in the interest of justice and pas 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 Pleased to grant stay of all further proceedings in pursuance to impugned notice vide proceedings Ref.No. 158/2025/A dated 25-10-2025 issued by the 4th respondent in the interest of justice and pass Counsel for the Petitioner(S): 1. RAVI KUMAR CHALAMALASETTI Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. GP FOR REVENUE The Court made the following: 3 THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE D RAMESH WRIT PETITION NO: 31857/2025 ORDER: This Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of Constitution of India with the following prayer for: "...Pleased to issue an order or direction more particularly in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the 4th respondent in issuing the impugned notice vide Ref. No. 158/2025/A dated 25-10-2025, despite the fact of adjudication by this Honble High Court vide order dated 05.12.2022 in WP. No.29633 of 2015 on the same grounds of alleged encroachment by the petitioners on the subject lands adm. Ac 1.74 cents covered by RS.No. 266/6 of Gopannapalem Village, Dendaluru Mandal as illegal arbitrary and violation of Article 14, 16,21 and 300-A of constitution of India as well as principles of Natural justice. Consequently, set aside the impugned notice vide Ref. No. 158/2025/A dated 25-10-2025 passed by 4th respondent in the interest of justice and pass..." 2. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue appearing for respondents. 3. Aggrieved by the impugned notice vide Ref. No. 158/2025/A dated 25.10.2025, the present writ petition has been filed. Infact, the petitioners have approached this Court earlier in W.P.No.29683 of 2015, alleging that the respondents are interfering and dispossessing the petitioners from the subject property, the said writ petition was disposed of by this Hon'ble Court vide order dated 05.12.2022, directing the respondents not to interfere with the possession of the petitioners in respect of the subject lands till the pattas granted in their favour. 4 4. While things stood thus, the 5th respondent has approached this Hon'ble Court in W.P No.4890 of 2025, seeking a direction against respondent No.4 for not taking action pursuant to his endorsement dated 07.02.2024 issued in response to the Spandana grievance No. ELR202401085238 dated 08.01.2024. The said writ petition was disposed of based on the instructions of learned Assistant Government Pleader, directing the respondents to conduct an enquiry pursuant to the endorsement dated 07.02.2024 and pass a speaking order in accordance with law, within a period of four (04) months from the date of receipt of copy of this order. In compliance to the said order the present impugned notice on 25.10.2025 has been issued. Questioning the said notice, the present writ petition is filed. 5. Infact, both the petitioners as well as the unofficial respondents, instead of approaching the competent civil court to establish their respective rights over the property, they have been repeatedly approaching this Court by filing writ petitions. Infact, the impugned notice has been issued by the respondents strictly in compliance with the directions of this Court vide W.P.No.4890 of 2025. Infact the earlier writ petition filed by the petitioners was also dispose of based on the submissions of the learned Assistant Government Pleader that the respondents would not interfere with the possession of the petition over the subject property except under due process of law. A perusal of the orders passed in the writ petitions filed by the writ petitioners and as the unofficial respondents clearly discloses that neither the writ petition was decided on merits nor were any the factual aspects. In circumstances, the impugned 5 notice is only pursuant to the orders issued by this Court, and the petitioners have every opportunity to place relevant material before the authorities. Pursuant to the said notice this court is not inclined to interfere with or entertain such type of writ petitions. 6. Accordingly, the Writ Petition is dismissed, granting liberty to the petitioners to approach the competent civil or to place relevant material before the authority in response to the notice dated 25.10.2025. As a sequel thereto, miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shall stand closed. __________________ JUSTICE D RAMESH Date 18.11.2025 KKV