Borusu Veerabhadra Rao, v. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH
WP/31942/2025 · 2025-11-18
Venkata Jyothirmai Pratapa
body2025
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 45705 (AP) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 45705 (AP) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
Dr.VJP,J W.P.No.31942 of 2025 APHC010614662025
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction)
WEDNESDAY,THE NINETEENTH DAY OF NOVEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA WRIT PETITION NO: 31942 OF 2025 Between:
1. Borusu Veerabhadra Rao,, S/o Tatayya, Aged 50 years, Occ Cultivation, R/o Kothapeta Village and Mandal, Dr. B.R. Ambedkar Konaseema District. ...Petitioner AND
1. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, Rep.by its Principal Secretary to Government, Home Department, Secretariat, Velagapudi, Amaravati, Guntur District. 2. The Superintendent of Police, Dr. B.R. Ambedkar Konaseema District at Amalapuram. 3. The Deputy Superintendent of Police, Dr. B.R. Ambedkar Konaseema District at Amalapuram. 4. The Station House officer, Kothapeta Police Station, Dr. B.R. Ambedkar Konaseema District
5. Village Revenue Officer, Kothapeta Village and Mandal Dr. B.R. Ambedkar Konaseema District
6. Tahsildhar, Kothapeta Mandal, Dr. B.R. Ambedkar Konaseema District
Dr.VJP,J W.P.No.31942 of 2025
7. Pepakayala Subba Rao, S/o Satyanarayana, Aged 50 years, Occ Business, R/o Kothapeta Village and Mandal, Dr. B.R. Ambedkar Konaseema District
8. Sanupathi Kanakeswara Rao, S/o. Sanupati Venkata Rao, Aged 47 years Occ Business, R/o. Kothapeta Village and Mandal Dr. B.R. Ambedkar Konaseema 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 tomay 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 particularly, the 4th respondent at the instance of Respondents No. 7 and 8 in insisting me to appear before his authority and thereby directing me to vacate from the agricultural lands of Ac.0.66 cents in R.S No.228/3 situated in Vanapalli Village, Kothapeta Mandal, Dr.
B.R. Ambedkar Konaseema District and yield to the terms of Respondents No. 7 and 8 as illegal, irregular, irrational, without any authority or sanction of law and without jurisdiction and violative of Articles 14, 21 and 300-Aof the Constitution of India and consequently direct the respondents particularly 4th respondent not to interfere in any manner with petitioners personal life, liberty and property nor insist them to appear before their authority for settling terms with Respondents No.7 and 8 in respect of the subject property and pass such Counsel for the Petitioner: PASALAPUDI SATYA HARITHA Counsel for the Respondents: GP FOR HOME
Dr.VJP,J W.P.No.31942 of 2025 The Court made the following ORDER:
1. This Writ Petition is filed with the following prayer: <…to issue a writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of WRIT OF MANDAMUS declaring the action of the respondents particularly, the 4th respondent at the instance of Respondents No. 7 and 8 in insisting me to appear before his authority and thereby directing me to vacate from the agricultural lands of Ac.0.66 cents in R.S No.228/3 situated in Vanapalli Village, Kothapeta Mandal, Dr. B.R. Ambedkar Konaseema District and yield to the terms of Respondents No. 7 and 8 as illegal, irregular, irrational, without any authority or sanction of law and without jurisdiction and violative of Articles 14, 21 and 300-Aof the Constitution of India and consequently direct the respondents particularly 4th respondent not to interfere in any manner with petitioners personal life, liberty and property nor insist them to appear before their authority for settling terms with Respondents No.7 and 8 in respect of the subject property..=
2. Heard Ms.Pasalapudi Satya Haritha, learned counsel for petitioner and Sri V.Farook, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Home for respondents. 3. Learned counsel for petitioner would submit police are calling the petitioner to the police station at the instance of respondent Nos.7 and 8 and threatening the petitioner to vacate from the agricultural land which was under possession by the petitioner. 4. As against that, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Home would submit that basing on the complaint given by the petitioner, a crime has been registered against the respondent Nos.7 and 8 and the police are not interfering in the civil dispute between the parties. Dr.VJP,J W.P.No.31942 of 2025
5. Recording the same, the writ petition is disposed of.
However, police are directed to follow due process of law regarding the above said crime. As a sequel thereto, miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending shall stand closed. ________________________________________
Dr. JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA
Date: 19.11.2025 Dvs
Dr.VJP,J W.P.No.31942 of 2025
150
THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA
WRIT PETITION NO: 31942 OF 2025 Date: 19.11.2025 Dvs