IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH :: AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) WEDNESDAY, THE THIRTIETH DAY OF APRIL TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE 7.^ A PRESENT THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE VENKATESWARLU NIMMAGADDA WRIT PETITION NO: 11288 OF 2025 H Between: 1. Thota Ramulamma, W/o Late Ramudu, Aged 70 years, Occ Cultivation, R/o Teppalavalasa Village, Ranasthalam Mandal, Srikakulam District. 2. Thota Bhadrayya, S/o Late Raniudu, Aged 50 years, Occ Cultivation, R/o Teppalavalasa Village, Ranastjialam Mandal, Srikakulam District. 3. Thota Koteswara Rao, S/o Late Ramudu, Aged 44 years, Occ Cultivation, R/o Teppalavalasa Village, Rahasthalam Mandal, Srikakulam District ...PETITIONER(S) AND 1. The State of Andhra Pradesh,:Rep.by its Principal Secretary to Government, Revenue Department, Secretariat, Velagapudi, Amaravati, Guntur District. 2. District Collector, Srikakulam District. 3. Revenue Divisional Officer, Srikakulam Division, Srikakulam District. 4. Tahsildar, Ranasthalam Mandak^Srikakulam District. 5. Mandal Surveyor, O/o Tahsildar, Ranasthalam Mandal, Srikakulam District. ...RESPONDENTS 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 interfering with the petitioners agricultural lands admeasuring Ac.1.50 cents in Survey No.111-8p/J, situated in Teppalavalasa Village of Ranasthalam Mandal in Srikakulam District and further trying to dispossess the petitioners from their said lands, without following any known procedure established by law, as illegal, arbitrary, violative of principles of natural justice and offends Articles 14, 21 and 300-A of Constitution of India and consequently direct the respondents not to interfere with petitioners' peaceful possession and enjoyment of their said lands. lA NO: 1 OF 2025 Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the writ petition, the High Court may be pleased to direct the respondents not to dispossess the petitioners from their agricultural land admeasuring Ac.1.50 cents in Survey No.111-8p/J, situated in Teppalavalasa Village of Ranasthalam Mandal in Srikakulam District, pending disposal of the main writ petition. Counsel for the Petitioner(s):SRI SRINIVAS AMBATI Counsel for the Respondents: GP FOR REVENUE The Court made the following: ORDER APHC010227662025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3329] TV B? WEDNESDAY ,THE THIRTIETH DAY OF APRIL TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE VENKATESWARLU NIMMAGADDA WRIT PETITION NO: 11288/2025 Between: ...PETITIONER(S) Thota Ramulamma and Others AND ...RESPONDENT{S) The State Of Andhra Pradesh and Others Counsel for the Petitioner(S); 1.SR1NIVAS AMBATl Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1.GP FOR REVENUE The Court made the following: 2 NV,J W.P. NO. 11288 OF 2025 THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE VENKATESWARLU NIMMAGADDA WRIT PETITION NO: 11288/2025 ORDER: The present writ petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking following relief; “ ...to issue a writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of WRIT OF MANDAMUS declaring the action of the respondents in interfering with the petitioners' agricultural lands admeasuring Ac. 1.50 cents in Survey No.111-8p/J, situated in Teppalavalasa Village of Ranasthalam Mandal in Srikakulam District and further trying to dispossess the petitioners from their said lands, without following any known procedure established by law, as illegal, arbitrary, violative of principles of natural justice and offends Articles 14, 21 and 300-A of Constitution of India and consequently direct the respondents not to interfere with petitioners' peaceful possession and enjoyment of their said lands and pass... "(in verbatim) 2. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned Government Pleader for Revenue for the respondents. During hearing, learned counsel for the petitioners, without touching the merits of the case, requested this Court to issue a direction to the respondents dispossess/ evict the petitioners from his respective property without 3. not to following due process of law. 4. Learned Government Pleader for the respondents furnished the written dated 29.04.2025 issued by the 4'^ respondent, wherein it is / instructions / stated as follows; “Though the respondents did not enter into the questioned lands and did not interfere with the 3 possession of the Petitioners; the Petitioners having an apprehension that the assigned lands being resumed to the non-occupied by them would be Government by the respondents, raising several contentions with unclean hands by suppressing the material facts, which deserves no consideration. 11) It is respectfully submitted that the relief sought for by the Petitioners deserves no consideration and the Writ Petitions are liable to be dismissed on devoid of merits at the admission stage..” 4. When the petitioners in settled possession and enjoyment of the are property, the petitioners cannot be dispossessed without following due process of law 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” . Therefore, if the property, the respondents are petitioners from the subject property. petitioners are in possession of the subject directed not to evict/ dispossess the except by due process of law. 5. With the above direction, the writ petition is disposed of at the stage of admission with the consent of both the counsel. No costs. Consequently, miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shall also stand closed. 2004(1) see 769 Sd/- SHAIK MOHD. RAFI ASSISTAN GISTRAR r. //TRUEeOPY// I SEeilON OFFieER To, 1. The Principal Secretary, State of,Andhra Pradesh, Revenue Department, Secretariat, Velagapudi, Amaravati, Guntur District. 2. The District Collector, Srikakulam District. ocrici A 3. The Revenue Divisional Officer, Srikakulam Division, Srikakulam District. 4. The Tahsildar, Ranasthalam Mandal, Srikakulam District. 5. The Mandal Surveyor, O/o Tahsildar, Ranasthalam Mandal, Srikakulam District. 6. One CC to SRI. SRINIVAS AMBATI Advocate [OPUC] 7. Two CCs to GP FOR REVENUE, High Court of Andhra Pradesh. [OUT] 8. Three C.D.Copies nm HIGH COURT DATED; 30/04/2025 ORDER WP.No.11288 of 2025 p 21 MAY 2025 ^ ^ Current bection . ^ ^i«!»£g»PATCHePy disposing of the wp without costs