APHC010223632018 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3209] TUESDAY, THE EIGHTEENTH DAY OF NOVEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE NINALA JAYASURYA WRIT PETITION NO: 9856/2018 Between: 1. CHENNA NAGA GANGARAJU,, S/O. SEETHARAMA SWAMY, AGED. 51 YEARS, OCC. CULTIVATION, R/O. SATHUPALLI ROAD, VISSANNAPET VILLAGE AND MANDAL, KRISHNA DISTRICT. ...PETITIONER AND 1. PRL SECY L A DEPT STATE OF A P, STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, LAND ACQUISITION DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT, VELAGAPUDI, AMARAVATI, GUNTUR DISTRICT. 2. DISTRICT COLLECTOR, KRIHSNA DISTRICT AT MACHILIPATNAM 3. JOINT COLLECTOR, MACHILIPATNAM, KRISHNA DISTRICT. 4. LAND ACQUISITION OFFICERCUMREVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER, NUZIVIDU, KRISHNA DISTRICT. 5. TAHSILDAR, CHATRAI MANDAL, KRISHNA DISTRICT. ...RESPONDENT(S): Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. SARATH KUMAR D Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. GP FOR LAND ACQUISITION (AP) NJS,J W.P No.9856 of 2018 2 The Court made the following Order: Heard Mr. Shaik Jahangeer Basha, learned counsel representing the learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. K Arjun Chowdary, learned Assistant Government Pleader. 2. The grievance of the petitioner in the present writ petition, in short, is that the respondents are insisting him to vacate from the land in an extent of Ac.3.63 cents and Ac.3.13 cents i.e., total extent of Ac.6.76 cents situate in Survey No.5/2B and 6 of Chatrai Village and Mandal of Krishna District, without following due procedure as per law. 3. The learned counsel for the petitioner inter alia submits that the petitioner is the absolute owner and possessor of the above said extent of land, which was purchased vide Registered Sale Deed Document No.2241/2006 dated 19.06.2006. He submits that the petitioner is in possession and enjoyment of the said land and the revenue authorities mutated the petitioner’s name in the relevant records and issued Pattadar Passbooks and Title Deeds in favor of the petitioner after following due procedure as contemplated under the provisions of Andhra Pradesh Rights in Land and Pattadar Passbooks Act, 1971 and Rules made there under. 4. He submits that as the respondent No.5 is trying to interfere with the petitioner’s possession and enjoyment of the subject matter property without issuing any notice, the petitioner was constrained to file the present writ petition. He further submits that if the petitioner is dispossessed from the subject matter property without adhering to the procedure contemplated under law, serious prejudice and irreparable loss would be caused. Making the said submissions, the learned counsel seeks to allow the writ petition and grant appropriate reliefs, as prayed for. 5. On the other hand, the learned Assistant Government Pleader referring to the instructions dated 11.11.2025 received from the respondent No.4, made NJS,J W.P No.9856 of 2018 3 submissions inter alia to the effect that the averments made in the affidavit filed in support of the writ petition are not correct and that if further time is granted, appropriate counter-affidavit would be filed. 6. This Court, after considering the matter with reference to the grievance of the petitioner and the material filed along with the writ petition, is of the opinion that the matter needed not be kept pending, for filing counter-affidavit by the concerned respondents. Suffice to state that, at the time of considering the matter ‘for Admission’, a learned Judge of High Court of Judicature at Hyderabad for the State of Telangana and Andhra Pradesh issued directions dated 28.03.2018 to the respondents in I.A No.1 of 2018 that they shall not interfere with the petitioner’s possession in respect of the subject matter land, but the respondents are not precluded from proceeding as per law. 7. Admittedly, as seen from the instructions dated 11.11.2025, no action, in spite of the liberty granted by the Court to the respondents, appears to have been initiated. In such circumstances, more particularly in the light of the order dated 28.03.2018, this Court deems it appropriate to dispose of the writ petition, providing that no coercive action in respect of the subject matter property shall be initiated except by following the due procedure as contemplated under law. 8. With the above directions, this Writ Petition is disposed of. No costs. Miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shall stand closed. __________________________ JUSTICE NINALA JAYASURYA Date:18.11.2025 Ksj