IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH :: AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) MONDAY, THE FIFTH DAY OF MAY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE VENKATESWARLU NIMMAGAD WRIT PETITION NO: 11841 OF 202^ / Between: Korada Raju, S/o.Korada Krishna, Dr.No 4954-4/2, Balayya Sastry Lay out. Opposite to Padmavati Guest House, 4*^ Town Up, Seetamma Dhara, Andhra Pradesh, Pin-530013. (Aadhaar No 4620 9225 9484) ...Petitioner AND 1. The State Of Andhra Pradesh, Represented by its Principal Secretary Revenue Department, Secretariat Buildings at Velagapudi,Guntur District, Andhra Pradesh. 2. The Revenue Divisional Officer, Bheemunipatnam, Visakhapatnam District, Andhra Pradesh. 3. The Tahsildar, Anandapuram Mandal, Visakhapatnam District, Andhra Pradesh. 4. Chairman, Visakhapatnam Urban Development Authority, VUDA Complex, Siripuram, Visakhapatnam. 5. The District Collector, Visakhapatnam District. Andhra Pradesh. ...Respondents Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India is filed praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased to issue a Writ direction, order or orders more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the respondents 1 to 5 herein in trying to occupy and destroying, without giving any notice or any authority, the Cashew nut plantations existing in the dry land admeasuring Ac. 5.00 Cents I action of Gudilova Village, Bheemuni Patnam tn %* Mandal, Visakhapatnam district belonging to the way of D Patta Vide. No. 2294/1371 dt 23-06-1962 the arbitrary, violation of Article 14 and 300A of the Consequentially stay of all further proceedings. ^ lA NO: 1 OF 2025 respondents, obtained by same as illegal. Constitution of India Petition under Section 151 circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to stay of all further proceedings pertaining to occupying and destroying, without giving any notice or any authority, the Cashew nut plantations existing in the dry land admeasuring Ac. 5.00 cents in Sy. No. 91 p m Gudilova Village, Bheemuni Patnam Mandal, Bheemuni Patnam Revenue Division CPC is filed praying that in the Visakhapatnam district belongs the respondents, obtained by way of D Patta vide No. 2294/1371 df23-06 1962. to Counsel for the Petitioner Counsel for the Respondents: GP FOR REVENUE :SRI. NALLURI RAMESH BABU Sri Somisetfy Ganesh Babu, Standing Counsei The Court made the foliowing: 1 NV,J W.P.No.ll841of2025 APHC010224282025 / IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3329] MONDAY ,THE FIFTH DAY OF MAY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE VENKATESWARLU NIMMAGADDA WRIT PETITION NO: 11841/2025 Between: t \ t-4 t: ; ...HtllrlONtR AND The State Of Andhra Pradesh and Others Counsel for the Petitioner: 1.NALLURI RAMESH BABU Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1.SOMISETTY GANESH BABU SC For VUDAand MUDA ...RESPONDENT(S) 2. The Court made the following: 2 NV,J W.P.No.ll841of 2025 The Court made the following: 1. This writ petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, to issue Writ of Mandamus, claiming the following direction: ‘‘To issue issue a Writ direction, order or orders more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of respondents 1 to 5 herein in trying to occupy and destroying, without giving any notice or any authority, the Cashew nut plantations existing in the dry land admeasuring Ac. 5.00 Cents in Gudilova Village, Bheemuni Patnam Mandat, Visakhapatnam district belonging to the respondents, obtained by way of D Patta Vide. No. 2294/1371 dt 23-06-1962 the same as illegal, arbitrary, violation of Article 14 and 300A of the Constitution of India, consequentially stay of all further proceedings” The case of the petitioner is that, petitioner claims to be purchaser of an 2. extent of Ac.5-00 cents in Sy.No.91P, Gudilova village, Bheemuni Patnam Mandal, Visakhapatnam District. The petitioner has been in peaceful possession and enjoyment of the subject land without any interruption whatsoever. The petitioner submits that, respondents are trying to interfere with the peaceful possession and enjoyment of the petitioner’s subject land. Questioning the inaction of respondents, the present writ petition is filed. Learned Government Pleader for Revenue placed on record written instructions furnished by the Tahsildar, Anandapuram dated 05.05.2025, wherein it is submitted that the land admeasuring an extent of Ac. 11-35 cents inSy.No.91 3. of Gudilova Village stands classified as VAGU Poramboke (Objectionable NV,J W.P.No.11841 of 2025 Poramboke). The same has been notified in the list of prohibited Section 22A(1)(a) at SI.No.120. In Form-Ill (List of Assignments) of Gudilova Village, no assignments were granted in Sy.No.91p of Gudilova Village. D-Patta which is said to have been issued in favour of the petitioner’s grandfather Sri Korada Ramulu s/o Gutayya is not genuine and no such D-Patta v»'as granted with reference to 2294/1371 dated 23.06.1962. Further in D-Patta Xerox furnished by the petitioner, it is noticed tha Sy.No. was mentioned as 91 p of Gudilova village. But as seen in the copy of translated D-Patta, the Sy.No mentioned as 73p to an extent of Ac.5-00 cents and village Kothhavalasa which belongs to Bheemunipatnam Mandal. The assignment which is said to be granted in favour of the petitioner’s grandfather is not correct and all the documents submitted by the petitioner are fake and fabricated. Based on the above written instructions, learned Government Pleader for Revenue requested to dismiss the writ petition. prope The . was name as 4. During hearing, learned counsel for the petitioner, without touching the merits of the case, requested this Court to issue a direction to the respondents not to dispossess the petitioner from his land without following due process of law. 5. Learned Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue submits that, the respondents would follow due process of law and requested to pass appropriate orders. NV,J W.P.No.11841 of 2025 6. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned Revenue and perused the material available Government Pleader for on record. 7. When the petitioner are in settled possession and enjoyment of the property, he 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 petitioner is in possession of the subject property, the respondents are directed dispossess the petitioner from the subject not to prope^rty, except by following due nrocess of lav' 8. With the above direction, the writ petition is disposed of at the stage of admission with the consent of both the counsel. No costs. 9. Consequently, miscellaneous petitions closed. pending, if any, shall also stand Sd/- K.J. RAJA BABU ASSISTANT REGISTRAR // ^ //TRUE COPY// SECTION OFFICER To, 1. The Principal Secretary Pradesh. Secretariat Buildings Pradesh. Revenue Department. State of Andhra at Velagap.jdi.Guntur District. Andhra 2. The Revenue Divisional District. Andhra Pradesh.'" 3. The Tahsildar. Anandapuram Pradesh. 4. Chairman. Officer. Bheemunipatnam,' Visakhapatnam Mandal. Visakhapatnam District. Andhra Visakhapatnam Urban Complex, Siripuram, Visakhapatnam Development Authority, VUDA 5. The District Collector, Visakhapatnam District, Andhra Pradesh.(1 to 5 by RPAD) 6. One CC to SRI. NALLURI RAMESH BABU Advocate [OPUC] 7. One CC to Sri Somisetty Ganesh Babu, Standing Counsel [OPUC] 8. Three CD Copies KSR -M-i # r HIGH COURT DATED:05/05/2025 ORDER r WP.No.11841 of 2025 I 2ss£?m B ^ Current Section disposing the writ petition without COSTS