APHC010173262019 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3458] WEDNESDAY, THE THIRTY FIRST DAY OF DECEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE KIRANMAYEE MANDAVA WRIT PETITION NO: 7505/2019 Between: 1. THUMMA VENKANNA,, S/O. VISSAIAH, HINDU, AGED ABOUT 41 YEARS, OCC- AGRICULTURE, R/O. KATRAVULAPALLI VILLAGE, JAGGAMPETA MANDAL, EAST GODAVARI DISTRICT. 2. THUMRNA NARASIMHA RAJU,, S/O. VISSAIAIA, HINDU, AGED ABOUT 39 YEARS, OCC- AGRICULTURE, R/O. KATRAVULAPALLI VILLAGE, JAGGAMPETA MANDAL, EAST GODAVARI DISTRICT. ...PETITIONER(S) AND 1. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, 7,CPRESENTED BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, REVENUE (ENDOWMENTS) DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT BUILDINGS, VELAGAPUDI AT AMARAVATHI, GUNTUR DISTRICT. 2. SRI PANUGANTI LAKSHMI VENKAYAMMA CHOULTRY, REPRESENTED BY ITS EXECUTIVE OFFICER, KATRAVULAPALLI VILLAGE, JAGGAMPETA MANDAL, EAST GODAVARI 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 or order or direction more particularly one in the nature of WRIT OF MANDAMUS declaring the action of the Respondents herein particularly Respondent No.2 in interfering with the petitioners peaceful possession and enjoyment of the Agricultural land situated at Sy.No.56 of 2 Katravulapalli Village, Jaggampeta Mandal, East Godavari District despite the petitioners had produced the revenue records establishing their title and possession as nothing but illegal, arbitrary, highhanded and violative of Article 21 and 300-A of Constitution of India and consequently direct the respondents not to interfere with the petitioners peaceful possession and enjoyment of the Agricultural land situated at Sy.No.56 of Katravulapalli Village, Jaggampeta Mandal, East Godavari District IA NO: 1 OF 2019 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 respondent no.2 not to interefere with the petitioners peaceful possession and enjoyment of the agricultural land situated at Sy.No.56 of Katravulapalli village, jaggampeta Mandal, East Godavari District pending disposal of the above writ petition. IA NO: 2 OF 2019 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 amend the description of the land as situated at Sy.No.56 of Yerrampalem Village, Gandepalli Mandal, East Godavari District instead of land in Sy.No.56 of Katravulapalli Village, Jaggampeta Mandal, East Godavari District in the affidavit filed in support of the writ petition, main writ petition and also in the interlocutory application and pass Counsel for the Petitioner(S): 1. A K KISHORE REDDY Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. T BALAJI 2. GP FOR ENDOWMENTS (AP) The Court made the following: 3 THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE KIRANMAYEE MANDAVA WRIT PETITION NO: 7505 OF 2019 ORDER: Heard Sri K.Nagendra Reddy, learned counsel representing Sri A.K.Kishore Reddy, learned counsel for the petitioners, the learned Assistant Government Pleader for Endowments for respondent No.1 and learned Standing Counsel for respondent No.2. 2. The grievance of the petitioners is against the inaction of the 7th respondent in proposing to evict the petitioners from the subject property situated in Sy.No.56 of Yerrampalem Village, Gandepalli Mandal, East Godavari District. 3. The contention of the petitioners is that the subject property is an ancestral property of the petitioners. However, the 2nd respondent is interfering with the peaceful possession of the petitioners in respect of the subject property. 4. The 2nd respondent filed counter affidavit stating that the subject property is absolute property of the 2nd respondent/choultry registered under the provisions of the Andhra Pradesh Charitable and Hindu Religious Institutions and Endowments Act, 30 of 1987 (in short ‘the Act’). In 2019, the respondents also conducted an auction of the leasehold rights of the subject property, and the successful bidder was put in possession of the same. Since then, the same has been in the possession of the Choultry. The learned Standing Counsel appearing on behalf of the 2nd respondent would contend 4 that after the 2nd respondent had come into possession of the subject property, a periodical auction of leasehold rights in respect of the subject property was conducted. 5. However, learned counsel for the petitioners disputes the same. 6. Having regard to the same, this Court deems it appropriate to dispose of the writ petition, granting liberty to the 2nd respondent to follow the procedure under the provisions of the Act for eviction of the petitioners by issuing notice to the petitioners and affording sufficient opportunity of hearing to the petitioners. 7. With the above observation, the writ petition is disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs. As a sequel, all pending miscellaneous applications shall stand closed. _______________________________ JUSTICE KIRANMAYEE MANDAVA Dated: 31.12.2025 Pmk 5 246 THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE KIRANMAYEE MANDAVA WRIT PETITION NO: 7505/2019 Dated: 31.12.2025 Pmk