IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH :: AMARAVATI' (Special Original Jurisdiction) MONDAY, THE TWENTY SEVENTH DAY OF JANUARY' TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE ' PRESENT V THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE TARLADA RAJASEKHAR RAO WRIT PETITION NO: 1869 OF 2025 Between: 1. Kuppili Lakshman Rao, S/o. Late Seemayya, R/o. Ranasthalam Village Ranasthalam Mandal Srikakulam District, Andhra Pradesh. 2. Kuppili Neetaveni, D/o. Late Seemayya, R/o. Ranasthalam Village, Ranasthalam Mandal Srikakulam District, Andhra Pradesh. ‘ ' 3. Talle Sema'amma, D/o. Late Kuppili Pedayya, R/o. Ranasthalam Village, Ranasthalam Mandal, Srikakulam District, Andhra Pradesh. 4. . Kuppili Seethayya, S/o. Late Lakshmudu, R/o. Ranasthalam Village, Ranasthalam Mandal, Srikakulam District, Andhra Pradesh. 5. Kuppili Naveen, S/o. Kuppili Lakshman Rao, R/o. Ranasthalam Village Ranasthalam Mandal, Srikakulam District, Andhra Pradesh. ' 6. Dunga Suryanarayana, S/o, Late Gurayya, R/o. Ranasthalam Village Ranasthalam Mandal Srikakulam District, Andhra Pradesh. ...PETITIONr£R(S) AND 1. The State of Andhra Pradesh, Rep. by its Principal Secretary to Government, Panchayat Raj and Rural Development, Department Secretariat Building, Amaravati, Guntur District. 2. The District Collector, Srikakularri, Srikakulam District, Andhra Pradesh. 3. The Revenue Divisional Officer, Srikakulam^^trict, Andhra Pradesh. 4. The Tahsildar, Ranasthalam Mandal, Srikakulam District, Andhra Pradesh. 5. The Ranasthalam Grama Panchayat, is represented by its Secretary, Ranasthalam Village, 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 particularly, one in the nature of WRIT OF MANDAMUS declare the action of respondent authorities, who are making efforts to dispossess the petitioners from their house sites situated in survey No. 10, admeasuring located at Ranasthalam Village Srikakulam District, Andhra Pradesh, without following the procedure established by law. This act is illegal, arbitrary and violative of principles of natural justice and also violative of Articles 14,21 and 300A of the Constitution of India, as well as contrary to the judgment laid down by the Honble^^ex Court in Rame Gowda vs. M. Varadappa Naidu (2004) 1 SCC 769 and consequently directs the respondents not to interfere into the peaceful possession of the subject property situated in Survey No. 10 admeasuring to an extent of Ac.3.75 cents situated at RanasthalarfTVillage, Ranasthalam Mandal, Srikakulam District, Andhra Pradesh except the due process of law. ' lA NO: 1 OF 2025 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 respondents not to interfere in the peaceful possession of the petitioners subject property situated in Survey No. 10 admeasuring to an extent of Ac.3.75 cents situated at Ranasthalam Village, Ranasthalam Mandal, Srikakulam District, Andhra Pradesh except the due process of law. Counsel for the Petitioner(s): Sri. P VISESWAR RAO Counsel for the Respondents: GP FOR PANCHAYAT RAJ RURAL DEV The Court made the following Order: to an extent of Ac.3.75 cents. APHC010035332025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3330] MONDAY,THE TWENTY SEVENTH DAY OF JANUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE TARLADA RAJASEKHAR RAO WRIT PETITION NO: 1869/2025 Between: Kuppili Lakshman Rao and Others ...PETITIONER(S) AND ...RESPONDENT(S) The State Of Ap and Others Counsel for the Petitioner(S): 1.P VISESWAR RAO Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1.GP FOR PANCHAYAT RAJ RURAL DEV 2 The Court made the following order:- This Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of Constitution of India for the following relief/s:- “...to issue a Writ, Order or direction particularly, one in the nature of writ of Mandamus declaring the action of respondent authorities, who are making efforts to dispossess the petitioners from their house sites situated in survey No. 10, admeasuring to an extent of Ac.3.75 cents, located at Ranasthalam Village, Ranasthalam Mandal, Srikakulam District, Andhra Pradesh, without following the procedure established by law. This act is illegal, arbitrary and violative of principles of natural justice and also violative of Articles 14, 21 and 300A of the Constitution of India, as well as contrary to the judgment laid down by the Hon’ble Apex Court in Rame Gowda V. M. Varadappa Naidu (2004) 1 SCC 769 and consequently directs the respondents not to interfere into the peaceful possession of the subject property situated in Survey No.10 admeasuring to an extent of Ac.3.75 cents situated at Ranasthalam Village, Ranasthalam Mandal, Srikakulam District, Andhra Pradesh, except the due process of law and pass such other order or orders...” 2. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned counsel for the respondents. The 5*^ respondent by exercising the powers conferred under Sections 96, 98, 121, 137, 138A and 271 of the Andhra Pradesh Panchayat Raj Act, 1994 and G.O.Ms.No.168, MA Department dated 07.04.2012 and G.O.Ms.No.188 Panchayat Raj and Rural Development (PTS.IV), dated 21.07.2011, issued an urgent show caijise notice dated 17.12.2024, by calling for an explanationfrom the 3. # ■ petitioners, why they (petitioners) should not be evicted from Ac.3.75 cents out of total extent Ac. 16.86 cents in Survey No. 10 at Ranasthalam Village, Ranasthalam Mandal, Srikakulam District, which is a water tank bed area. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the main 4. grievance of the petitioners is that despite submitting the explanation to the aforesaid show cause notice, without considering the same, the respondents are trying to dispossess the petitioners from the subject property. Learned counsel for the petitioners further relied on the 5. judgment of the Hon’ble Apex Court rendered in Rame Gowda v. M.Varadappa Naidu^ for the proposition that a rightful owner, who has been wrongfully dispossessed of land, may retake possession if he can do so peacefully and without the use of unreasonable force. If the trespasser is in settled possession of the property belonging to the rightful owner, the rightful owner shall have to take recourse of law; he cannot take the law in his own hands and evict the trespasser or interfere with his possession. The law will come to the aid of a person in peaceful and settled possession by injuncting even a rightful owner from using force or taking law in his own hands, and also by restoring 1 (Zeo^) 1 see 769 4 him in possession even from the rightful owner (of course subject to the law of limitation), if the latter has dispossessed the prior possessor by use of force. 6. Without going into merits of the case, by relying on the judgment directed to examine the referred supra, the respondents are explanation offered by the petitioners to the aforesaid show cause accordance with law, and notice and pass appropriate orders, in the said decision to the petitioners. Till such time, communicate respondents are directed not to take any coercive steps against the subject property. 7. With the above directions, the Writ Petition is disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs. As a sequel thereto, miscellaneous Petitions pending, if any shall stand closed. Sd/- M.PRABHAKAR RAO ASSISTANT REGISTRAR //TRUE COPY// SECTION OFFICER To, Principal Secretary to Government, State of AP PanchayafRaj and Rural Development, Department Secretariat Building. Amaravati, 1. The Guntur District. ^ 2. The District Collector. SrikakulamTsrikakulam District. Andhra Pradesh. Divisional Officer, Srikakulam district, Andhra Pradesh. 3. The Revenue 4. The Tahsildar, Ranasthalam Mandal, Srikakulam District, Andhra Pradesh. 5. The Secretary, Ranasthalam Grama Panchayat, Ranasthalam Village Ranasthalam Mandal, Srikakulam District 6. One CC to Sri. P VISESWAR RAO Advocate [pPUC] 7. Two CCs to GP FOR PANCHAYAT RAJ RURAL DEV, High Court of Andhra Pradesh. [OUT] 8. Three CD Copies / LA Writ NS Sec HIGH COURT '\ DATED: 27/01/2025 \ i ORDER WP.No.1869 of 2025 2 Q MAR 2025 ^ . Current Section ^ ^J’gSPATCW^S^ DISPOSING THE WRIT PETITION WITHOUT COSTS