Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Andhra Pradesh · body

2025 DAILYLAW 47415 (AP)

K SANYASAMMA v. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH

WP/25018/2025 · 2025-09-14

Harinath N

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

APHC010490792025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3457] MONDAY,THE FIFTEENTH DAY OF SEPTEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE HARINATH.N WRIT PETITION NO: 25018/2025 Between: 1. K SANYASAMMA, WO K. KANAKARAJU, AGED ABOUT 42 YEARS, OCC VEGITABLE VENDOR, RESIDING ATOPPOSITE GOLLA VEEDHI, NEAR KRISHNA TEMPLE, KANITHI RH COLONY, VADLAPUDI, GAJUWAKA, VISAKHAPATNAM, PIN CODE 530046. 2. K. LAKSHMI,, W/O APPALANAIDU, AGED ABOUT 36 YEARS, OCC VEGITABLE VENDOR, RESIDING AT OPPOSITE GOLLA VEEDHI, NEAR KRISHNA TEMPLE, KANITHI RH COLONY, VADLAPUDI, GAJUWAKA, VISAKHAPATNAM, PIN CODE 530046. ...PETITIONER(S) AND 1. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, MUNICIPAL ADMINISTRATION, SECRETARIAT, AMARAVATHI. 2. THE GREATER VISAKHAPATNAM MUNICIPAL CORPORATION GVMC, REPRESENTED BY ITS COMMISSIONER, VISAKHAPATNAM, VISAKHAPATNAM DISTRICT. 3. THE TAHSILDAR, , GAJUWAKA, VISAKHAPATNAM DISTRICT. ...RESPONDENT(S): 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 a Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the 2nd 2 Respondents and their personnel without following due process of law interfering with petitioners respective properties vide possession certificate issued by the Respondent as arbitrary, illegal and also against Principles of Natural Justice and Article 21 of the Constitution of India and pass such IA 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 may be pleased to direct the Respondents not to interfere with the possession and enjoyment of petitioners respective properties vide possession certificates dt. 07.08.2011 pending disposal of the Writ Petition and pass such Counsel for the Petitioner(S): 1. O UDAYA KUMAR Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. GP FOR MUNCIPAL ADMN URBAN DEV The Court made the following: 3 THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE HARINATH.N WRIT PETITION NO: 25018 OF 2025 ORDER : 1. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners, learned Assistant Government Pleader for the 1st respondent and the learned standing counsel for the respondents 2 and 3. 2. The petitioners are approached this Court alleging that the respondent authorities are holding out threats of dispossession. It is submitted that they were granted house site pattas in the year 2011 and ever since then they have erected a small shed and eaking out their livelihood by selling vegetables. It is submitted that the 1st petitioner has also obtained trade license for conducting vegetable business. It is submitted that though the petitioners are entitled to enjoy the property, over which the respondent authorities have issued house site pattas. The respondent authorities have now holding out threats of dispossession without following due process of law. 3. Learned standing counsel for the 3rd respondent submits that the pattas issued to the petitioners are not available in the office and learned standing counsel for the 2nd respondent submits that the property forms part of the Raja Cheruvu. It is also submitted that the 2nd respondent has issued written instructions to the learned standing counsel duly intimating that Sy.No.1/6 of Vadlapudi Village, Gajuwaka Mandal, is a 4 lake area named as Raja cheruvu, the same is recorded in 22A prohibited land register of Gajuwaka Mandal. 4. Be that as it may, considering the submissions that the petitioners have been in possession and enjoyment of the said property for the last 30 years and the respondent authorities have recognized their possession and granted pattas. In such circumstances, the respondent authorities would have to follow the due process of law for dispossession of the petitioners. 5. With these observations, the writ petition is disposed off, making it clear that the respondent authorities not to disturb the peace of the petitioners or possession of the property without following due process of law. 6. Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed off. No costs. 7. Pending miscellaneous petitions, if any, shall stand closed. ____________________ JUSTICE HARINATH.N Date:15.09.2025 KGM 5 513 THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE HARINATH.N WRIT PETITION NO: 25018 OF 2025 Date: 15.09.2025 KGM