Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Andhra Pradesh · body

2025 DAILYLAW 46731 (AP)

Chinthala Parasaramayya v. State of Andhra Pradesh

WP/12777/2020 · 2025-09-24

B Krishna Mohan

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

APHC010197162020 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3233] THURSDAY, THE TWENTY FIFTH DAY OF SEPTEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE B KRISHNA MOHAN WRIT PETITION NO: 12777/2020 Between: 1. CHINTHALA PARASARAMAYYA, S/O LATE KANNALU AGE 60 YEAR DOOR NO.3-32. 60 YRS, BPM, LINGAPURAM VILLAGE, KOTAURATLA MANDAL, VISAKHAPATNAM DIST. 2. CHINTHALA GOVINDA, S/O LATE SRIRAMULU AGE 36 YEAR DOOR NO. 2 - 1B (2). 36 YRS, CULTIVATION, LINGAPURAM VILLAGE, KOTAURATLA MANDAL, VISAKHAPATNAM DIST. 3. CHINTHALA RAMANAMMA,, W/O LATE SRIRAMAMURTHI, AGE 40 YEAR DOOR NO. 2 - 80 (2). 40 YRS, CULTIVATION, LINGAPURAM VILLAGE, KOTAURATLA MANDAL, VISAKHAPATNAM DIST. 4. CHINTHALA LAKSHMI, W/O LATE APPAL NAIDU AGE 39 YEAR DOOR NO. 2-81 39 YRS, CULTIVATION, LINGAPURAM VILLAGE, KOTAURATLA MANDAL, VISAKHAPATNAM DIST. 5. CHINTHALA APPARAO,, S/O LATE CHINAKANNALU, DOOR NO.3-32 63YRS, CULTIVATION, LINGAPURAM VILLAGE, KOTAURATLA MANDAL, VISAKHAPATNAM DIST. 6. CHINTHALA APPALANAIDU,, S/O LATE KANNALU, DOOR NO. 3-34 70 YRS, CULTIVATION, LINGAPURAM VILLAGE, KOTAURATLA MANDAL, VISAKHAPATNAM DIST. 7. LALAM PEDA APPALANAIDU,, S/O LATE RAJULU, DOOR NO. 4B-29, 50 YRS, CULTIVATION, LINGAPURAM VILLAGE, KOTAURATLA MANDAL, VISAKHAPATNAM DIST. 8. LALAM CHINNA APPALANAIDU,, S/O LATE RAJULU, DOOR NO. 4- 2 HBKM,J W.P.No.12777 of 2020 30 45 YRS, CULTIVATION, LINGAPURAM VILLAGE, KOTAURATLA MANDAL, VISAKHAPATNAM DIST. 9. CHITIKELA APPALARAJU,, S/O VENKATARATNAM, DOOR NO. 1- 48/1, 65YRS, CULTIVATION, LINGAPURAM VILLAGE, KOTAURATLA MANDAL, VISAKHAPATNAM DIST. ...PETITIONER(S) AND 1. STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, , REP BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, REVENUE DEPARTMENT, VELAGAPUDI, AMARAVATHI, GUNTUR DIST., A.P. 2. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, VISAKHAPATNAM -531001 3. THE REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER, , NARSIPATNAM -531116, VISAKHAPATNAM DISTRICT, 4. THE TAHSILDAR, KOTAURATLA - 531085, VISAKHAPATNAM DISTRICT, 5. THE MANDAL SURVEYOR, 0/0 THE TAHSILDAR, KOTAURATLA - 531085, VISAKHAPATNAM DISTRICT. 6. VILLAGE SURVEYOR, GRAMA SACHIVALAYAM, LINGAPURAM VILLAGE, KOTAURATLA MANDAL, VISAKHAPATNAM DISTRICT - 531085 ...RESPONDENT(S): Counsel for the Petitioner(S): 1. P HEMACHANDRA Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. GP FOR REVENUE 3 HBKM,J W.P.No.12777 of 2020 The Court made the following Order: Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned Assistant Government Pleader for the respondents. 2. This writ petition was filed questioning the action of the respondents more particularly the respondent No.2 to 6 in trying to interfere with the peaceful possession and enjoyment of the petitioners’ different extents of land, totally admeasuring Ac.1-69 cents in Survey No.40/1 of Lingapuram Village, Kotauratla Mandal, Visakhapatnam District without following the due process of law for providing house sites under the <Navaratnalu Pedalandariki Illu= scheme. 3. On the other hand, the learned Assistant Government Pleader appearing for the respondents submits that the respondent authorities concerned will follow the due procedure with respect to the subject land. 5. In view of the above said facts and circumstances, the respondent Nos.2 to 6 are directed to deal with the subject land in an extent of Ac.1.69 cents in Survey No.40/1 of Lingapuram Village, Kotauratla Mandal, Visakhapatnam District, strictly in accordance with law, if so warranted for any public purpose and if not already utilized by now for the above said welfare scheme of housing for the poor. If the petitioners are otherwise found to be in possession of the same, they shall be dealt with strictly in accordance with law, by hearing all the parties concerned, including the petitioners, upon 4 HBKM,J W.P.No.12777 of 2020 verification of the records and the subject land an appropriate decision shall be taken on its own merits. Any dispossession from the subject land shall not be made except by following the due process of law. 6. Accordingly, this Writ Petition is disposed of. Interim order if any deemed to have been vacated. There shall be no order as to costs. As a sequel, Interlocutory Applications pending, if any, shall stand closed. __________________________ JUSTICE B. KRISHNA MOHAN 25.09.2025 PGT