::1:: APHC010224632025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3329] WEDNESDAY ,THE THIRTIETH DAY OF APRIL TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE VENKATESWARLU NIMMAGADDA WRIT PETITION NO: 11205/2025 Between: Thippuluri Ramayya @ Rami Reddy ...PETITIONER AND The State Of Andhra Pradesh and Others ...RESPONDENT(S) Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. GAJJALA MALLIKARJUNA REDDY Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. GP FOR REVENUE 2. GP FOR REGISTRATION AND STAMPS 2 THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE VENAKTESWARLU NIMMAGADDA WRIT PETITION NO.11205 of 2025 ORDER: 1. This writ petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking the following relief: “..to issue an appropriate writ order or direction more particularly one in the nature of WRIT OF MANDAMUS declaring the action of the respondents in trying to delete the name of the petitioner from the Online Revenue Records 1B ROR and Adangal in Sy No 310 to an extent of Ac 0 69 1/2 existed in Shankavaram Village Kanigiri Mandal Prakasam District from the online Revenue Records 1B and Adangal without following any procedure is illegal, arbitrary and discriminative and the same amounts to dereliction of the duties and consequently direct the respondents not to interfere in any manner with the petitioner property and pass...” 2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue appearing for the respondents. 3. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is the absolute owner and possessor of the subject property, admeasuring to an extent of Ac. 0.69½ cents in Sy. No. 310, 3 situated at Shankavaram Village, Kanigiri Mandal, Prakasam District and having acquired the said property from his vendor for valuable consideration under a registered sale deed dated 16.01.1997. Since then, the petitioner has been in peaceful possession and enjoyment of the subject property. The petitioner was also issued Pattadar Passbooks and Title Deed in respect of the said property. While things stood thus, to the utter surprise of the petitioner, respondent Nos.6 to 8 are trying to alter the online revenue records in respect of the subject property, allegedly at the behest of the 4th respondent. He further submits that the 4th respondent is trying to delete the petitioner’s name from the revenue records, mutate the names of respondent Nos. 6 to 8, and directed the petitioner to vacate the premises without issuing any notice and without following the due procedure contemplated under law. Hence, the present writ petition. 4. The learned Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue appearing for the respondents submits that if the respondents authorities intend to take any action against the petitioner’s subject property, the respondents authorities would follow due process of law and requested to pass appropriate orders. 4 5. It is settled proposition of law that when the petitioner is in settled possession and enjoyment of the property, the respondents are not entitled to interfere with the possession and enjoyment of the petitioner and such highhanded action of the respondents would amount to depriving the petitioner’s constitutional right guaranteed under Article 300-A of the Constitution of India, besides violation of Article 14 of the Constitution of India. Even assuming for a moment that this petitioner’s possession is illegal, still, the petitioner is required to be afforded an opportunity before taking appropriate action and in view of the law declared by the Apex Court in “Rame Gowda (dead) by L.Rs. v. M.Varadappa Naidu (Dead) by L.Rs.1, when the petitioner is in settled possession and enjoyment of the property, he cannot be dispossessed, without following due process of law. Therefore, the respondents are directed not to interfere with the petitioner’s possession of the subject property except by following due process of law. In the meanwhile, both parties are directed to maintain the status quo obtaining as on today with respect to the subject property, particularly regarding any alterations or changes in the revenue records. 1 2004 (1) SCC 769 5 6. With the above direction, the writ petition is disposed of. No costs. As a sequel, interlocutory applications if any pending, shall stand closed. _____________________________________ JUSTICE VENKATESWARLU NIMMAGADDA 30.04.2025 klk 6 THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE VENAKTESWARLU NIMMAGADDA 250 WRIT PETITION NO.11205 of 2025 30.04.2025 klk