IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH :: AMARAV (Special Original Jurisdiction) TUESDAY, THE SIXTH DAY OF MAY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE VENKATESWARLU NIMMAGADDA WRIT PETITION NO: 11936 OF 2025 Between: Gudimallam Babu, S/o. G.Subbaramaiah, Aged about 43 years, Occ; Agriculture, R/o.Mittagandi puram Village, Tirupati Urban Mandal, Tirupati District. ...PETITIONER AND 1. The State of Andhra Pradesh, Rep. by its Principal Secretary, Revenue Department, Secretariat, Velagapudi At Amaravati, Guntur District. 2. The District Collector, Tirupati, Tirupati District. 3. The Revenue Divisional Officer, Tirupati, Tirupati District. 4. The Tahsildar, Tirupati Urban, Tirupati 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 or order or direction more particularly one in the nature of writ of Mandamus declaring the action of respondents in interfering with their possession and enjoyment over an extent of petitioner Ac 0.77 cents situated in Sy.No.118/2, Mangalam, Settipalli village, Tirupati Urban Mandal, Tirupati, Tirupati District as illegal, arbitrary, unjust, without jurisdiction and in violation of Art 14 of the Constitution of India and consequently direct the respondents not to interfere with their possession over an extent of each petitioner Ac 0.77 cents situated in Sy.No 118/2, Mangalam, Settipalli village, Tirupati Urban Mandal, Tirupati, Tirupati District without following the due process of law. lA NO: 1 OF 2n?fi Petition under Section 151 CPC stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to direct the Respondents not to interfere with possession and enjoyment of the petitioner over the land to V;. praying that in the circumstances an extent of each petitioner Ac in Sy.No118/2, Mangalam, Settipalli village, Tirupati , pending disposal of the Writ 0.77 cents situated i Urban Mandal, Tirupati, Tirupati District Petition. Counsel for the Petitioner: M/s. M. HEMALATHA Counsel for the Respondent Nos.1 to 4: GP FOR REVENUE The Court made the following: ORDER ::1:: APHC010227312025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3329] TUESDAY ,THE SIXTH DAY OF MAY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE VENKATESWARLU NIMMAGADDA WRIT PETITION NO: 11936/2025 Between: Gudimallam Babu, ...PETITIONER AND ...RESPONDENT(S) The State Of Andhra Pradesh and Others Counsel for the Petitioner: 1.M HEMALATHA Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1.GP FOR REVENUE This Court made the following ORDER:- This writ petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India 1. seeking the following relief: “..to to issue a writ or order or direction more particularly one in the nature of writ of Mandamus declaring the action of respondents in interfering with their possession and enjoyment over an extent of petitioner Ac.0.77 cents situated in Sy.No.118/2 Mangalam, Settipalli village, Tirupati r— 2 Urban Mandal, Tirupati, Tirupati District, as illegal arbitrary unjust without jurisdiction and in violation of Art 14 of the Constitution of India and consequently direct the respondents not to interfere with their possession over an extent of each petitioner Ac.0.77 cents situated in Sy.No.118/2 Mangalam Settipalli village Tirupati Urban Mandal Tirupati Tirupati District without following the due process of law and to pass...” 2. During hearing, learned counsel for the petitioner, without touching the merits of the case, requested this Court to issue a direction to the respondents’ authorities not to dispossess the petitioner from the subject land, without following due process of law. 3. Learned Assistant Government Pleader for Respondents, submitted that if the petitioner is in continuous possession of subject land and the respondents’ authorities would follow due process of law and requested to pass appropriate orders in accordance with law. It is settled proposition of law that when the petitioner is in settled possession and enjoyment of the property, the respondents are not entitled to interfere with the possession and enjoyment of the petitioner and such highhanded action of the respondents would amount to depriving the petitioner’s constitutional right guaranteed under Article 300-A of the Constitution of India, besides violation of Article 14 of the Constitution of India. Even assuming for a moment that this petitioner’s 4.. possession is illegal, still, the petitioner is required to be afforded an opportunity before taking appropriate action. Therefore, if the petitioner is in possession of the subject property, the respondents are directed not to dispossess the petitioner from the subject property, except by following due process of law. With the above direction, the writ petition is disposed of, with the 6. consent of both the counsel. No costs. As a sequel, interlocutory applications if any pending, shall stand closed. Sd/- A. VIJAYA BABU ASSISTANT REGISTRAR ' //true copy// SECTION OFFICER To, Department, State of Andhra Amaravati Guntur District. The PrincipafSecretary, Revenue Pradesh, secretariat. Velagapudi. At Tirupati, Tirupati District. Tirupati, Tirupati District. 1 2. The District Collector 3. The Revenue Divisional Officer 4 The Tahsildar. Tirupati Urban. Tirupati D.stnct. Hemalatha, Advocate [OPUC] OneCC to M/s. M. 3^-two CCs to 7. Three CD Copies. of Andhra Pradesh. [OUT] GP for Revenue, High Court ssb HIGH COURT DATED:06/05/2025 ORDER WP.No.11936 of 2025 P 2»MAr 2025 Current ueciion . DISPOSING OF THE W.P. WITHOUT COSTS