[3505 ] IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH :: AMARAVA (Special Original Jurisdiction) TUESDAY ,THE SIXTH DAY OF MAY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE T.C.D.SEKHAR WRIT PETITION NO: 79fi DF 2024 Between: Chodipilli Appalanarasamma, W/o. Lachanna, Aged 51 years, R/o.D.Np. 15-3-271, Gangavaram, Pedagantyada, Pradesh 530044. Visakhapatnam, Andhra ...Petitioner AND 1. State of Andhra Pradesh, Rep.by its Principal Secretary Revenue Department, Secretariat, Velagapudi, Guntur District. 2. The District Collector, Visakhapatnam District. 3. The Tahsildar, Pedagantyada Mandal, Visakhapatnam. 4. The Special Deputy Collector, Land Acquisition, Steel Plant Visakhapatnam. Project^ ...Respondents Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court be pleased to issue any writ, order or direction nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the may more particularly one in the action of the respondents in resorting to dispossess the petitioner by demolishing the structures arbitrary and violation of is illegal, principle of natural justice besides violation of Article 14, 21 and 300 A of the Constitution of India and to consequently with the petitioner's house bearing direct the respondents not to interfere wi Door. No. 14-42-10/2 situated im an extent of 99 Sq Yds, Revenue Ward No. 51, Pedagantyada, Visakhapatnam. lA NO: 1 OF 2024 Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be plfasqd to direct the respondents not to dispossess the petitioner from her r^sidentiahhouse bearing Door. No. 14-42-10/2 situated in an extent of 99 'Sq Yds, Revenue Ward No. 51, Pedagantyada, Visakhapatnam in any manner including by demolishing the structures; Counsel for the PetitionenSRI. V V SATISH Counsel for the Respondents: GP FOR REVENUE : GP FOR LAND ACQUISITION The Court made the following: APHC010011242024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3505] THURSDAY, THE FIRST DAY OF MAY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE T.C.D.SEKHAR WRIT PETITION NO: 796/2024 Between; Chodipilli Appalanarasamma ...PETITIONER AND The State Of Andhra Pradesh and Others ...RESPONDENT(S) Counsel for the Petitioner; 1.VVSATISH Counsel for the Respondent(S); 1.GP FOR REVENUE (AP) 2.GP FOR LAND ACQUISITION (AP) ORDER:- The petitioner claims that she is the absolute owner and possessor of residential house bearing Door No. 14-42-10/2 situated in an extent of 99 sq. yards in Sy.No.67, Revenue Ward No.51 of Pedagantyada, Visakhapatnam. It is her further case that she has been in long standing possession of the said land and in due recognition of the same, the respondent confirmed that the petitioner is in possession of the said land through possession certificate in Rc.No.11410, dated 08.08.2018. 2. She further claims that she was found eligible by the Andhra Pradesh Housing Corporation and extended the benefit of housing scheme in her favour under PMAY-BLC dated 25.12.2020 as per the recommendations of Greater Visakhapatnam Municipal Corporation. In support of her claim rd copy of possession certificate dated 08.08.2018 issued by the 3 respondent is filed along with the writ petition. th 3. It is further case of the petitioner that the 4 respondent without issuing any notice and following the due process of law tried to dispossess her. Despite apprising the 4 respondent that she is in lawful possession of the subject land by virtue of possession certificate issued by the 3^^^ respondent, the 3'"'^ respondent continued to interfere with her possession and th questioning the said action, the present writ petition came to be filed. On the other hand, the 3''' respondent filed counter affidavit stating that the possession certificate issued by the 3'"^ respondent is not found in the office records and therefore, the same cannot be relied on. It is further stated that the land in Sy.No.67 of Pedagantyada Village and Mandal is classified as Poramboke and the same was acquired by the Steel Plant authorities for Rehabilitation Colony vide proceedings in Rc.No.3628/82-SO(E), dated 21.08.1982 by the 2"^^ respondent. It is contended that no house site patta was allotted to the 4. petitioner. It is further averred in the counter affidavit that during the inspection it is came to light that the petitioner illegally occupied the subject land and undertaking some construction activity. It is further averred in the counter affidavit that by virtue of common order dated 14.09.2022 passed in W.P.(PIL).No.140 of 2022 and W.P.No.12511 of 2010, this Court directed the concerned departments to undertake and complete the exercise of identification of unauthorized occupants/encroachers over the land belonging to the respective departments, within a period of two (02) months and thereafter take steps for removal of such 5. A encroachments by following the principles of natural justice i.e., issuing notices and providing opportunity of hearing to the unauthorized occupants/encroachers within a further period of four (04) weeks. With the above pleadings, the 3^^ respondent prayed to dismiss the writ petition. 6. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue appearing for the respondents. Perused the material available on record. 7. It is not in dispute that the petitioner was given possession certificate dated 08.08.2018. Further, it is also not in dispute that the 2"^^ respondent passed orders dated 25.12.2020 whereby and where under identified the petitioner as one of the beneficiaries for construction of house under PMAY-BLC scheme. The petitioner has filed the said copies along with the writ petition. Further on perusal of the counter-affidavit, it is clear 8. that the respondents have categorically stated that, the petitioner is in illegal occupation of subject land. Apart from the same, the 3'"'^ respondent did not deny the factum of passing order dated 25.12.2020 in favour of the petitioner by the 2"^ respondent. From the above, it is clear that the petitioner is in actual physical possession of the subject land. If at all the respondents want to evict the petitioner from the subject land, the same has to be N done in a manner know to law. Admittedly, in the case on hand, no notice is issued to the petitioner. 9. While ordering notice, this Court, by order dated 10.01.2024 directed the respondents ot maintain status quo in the matter. The said interim order is subsisting till date. Taking into consideration of the submissions made 10. by both the learned counsel, this Court feels that it is appropriate to dispose of the present writ petition directing the respondents not to dispossess the petitioner from the subject land except in accordance with law. 11. Accordingly, the Writ Petition is disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs. As a sequel, pending applications, if any, shall stand closed. Sd./- N NAGAiVSiVlA ASSISTANT REGISTRAR SECTION OFFICER //TRUE COPY// To, 1) The Principal Secretary Revenue Department, Secretariat, Velagapudi, Guntur District, State of Andhra Pradesh (BY SPECIAL MESSENGER) 2) The District Collector, Visakhapatnam District. 3) The Tahsildar, Pedagantyada Mandal, Visakhapatnam. 4) The Special Deputy Collector, Land Acquisition, Steel Plant Project, Visakhapatnam. (Addresses Nos.2 to 4 BY RAPD) 5) OneCCto SRI. V V SATISH Advocate [OPUC] 6) Two CCs to GP FOR REVENUE, High Court Of Andhra Pradesh. [OUT] 7) Two CCs to GP FOR LAND ACQUISITION, High Court Of Andhra Pradesh. [OUT] r»\ HIGH COURT DATED:06/05/2025 ORDER o 19 JUN 2025 WP.No.796 of 2024 OV c», DISPOSING THE WRIT PETITION WITHOUT COSTS