Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Andhra Pradesh · body

2025 DAILYLAW 51518 (AP)

Arepally Mallikharjuna Rao v. The State of Andhra Pradesh

WP/28195/2021 · 2025-12-21

Ravi Cheemalapati

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

APHC010467472021 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3332] MONDAY,THE TWENTY SECOND DAY OF DECEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE RAVI CHEEMALAPATI WRIT PETITION NO: 28195/2021 Between: 1. AREPALLY MALLIKHARJUNA RAO, S/O CHENNAKESAVULU, AGED ABOUT 43 YEARS, 2. AREPALLY RAMAKRISHNA, S/O CHENNAKESAVULU, AGED ABOUT 32 YEARS, (BOTH PETITIONERS ARE R/O CUMBAM VILLAGE AND MANDAL, PRAKASAM DISTRICT) ...PETITIONER(S) AND 1. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP., BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, PANCHAYATH RAJ AND RURAL DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT, VELAGAPUDI, AMARAVATI CAPITAL CITY, GUNTUR DISTRICT. 2. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR PANCHAYATHS, PRAKASAM DISTRICT, ONGOLE. 3. THE DISTRICT PANCHAYATH OFFICER, PRAKASAM DISTRICT. 2 4. THE MANDAL PARISHAD DEVELOPMENT OFFICER, CUMBUM MANDAL PRAJA PARISHAD, CUMBAM MANDAL, PRAKASAM DISTRICT. 5. THE TAHSILDAR, CUMBUM MANDAL, CUMBAM PRAKASAM DISTRICT. 6. THE ASSITANT EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, PANCHAYATH RAJ DEPARTMENT, CUMBUM, PRAKSAM DISTRICT. 7. CUMBAM GRAMA PANCHAYATH, REP., BY ITS, PANCHAYATH SECRETARY, CUMBAM VILLAGE AND MANDAL, PRAKASAM DISTRICT. 8. DEVARASETTY BRAHMAIAH, PANCHAYATH SECRETARY, CUMBUM GRAMA PANCHAYT, CUMBUM MANDAL, PRAKASAM DISTRICT. 9. THE STATION HOUSE OFFICER, CUMBUM POLICE STATION, PRAKASAM 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 topleased to issue an appropriate Writ, Order or Direction more particularly in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the Respondents in trying to dispossess the petitioners from the open land in Sy.No.99/2(99/1) near the house No.1/154 to an extent of Ac.00.12 1/2 cts as per the schedule in registered settlement deeds No.1114/2008 and 1114/2008 dated 23-04-2008 in the office of the Sub Registrar, Cumbam, Prakasam District, for construction of Grama Sachivalayam Building, as arbitrary, illegal, in violation of Article 14, 21 and 300 A of the Constitution of India and consequently direct the Respondents not to make any constructions and not interfere with the possession and enjoyment of the open Plot in Sy.No.99/2 (99/1) near the house No.1/154 to an extent of Ac.00.12 1/2 cts as per the schedule in 3 registered settlement deeds No.1114/2008 and 1114/2008 dated 23-04-2008 in the office of the Sub Registrar, Cumbam, Prakasam District, and to pass IA NO: 1 OF 2021 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 pleased to direct the Respondents not to make any constructions and not interfere with the possession and enjoyment of the open Plot in Sy.No.99/2(99/1) near the house No.1/154 to an extent of Ac.00.12 1/2 cts as per the schedule in registered settlement deeds No.1114/2008 & 1114/2008 dated 23-04-2008 in the office of the Sub Registrar, Cumbam, Prakasam District, pending disposal of the above writ petition and to pass IA NO: 2 OF 2021 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 To vacate interim order granted on 30.11.2021 in W.P.No.28195 of 2021 and dismiss the above writ, petition and pass such IA NO: 1 OF 2022 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 pleased to vacate the interim order dated 30.11.2021 made in I.A.No.1 of 2021 in W.P.No.28195 of 2021 and to dismiss the instant writ petition and to pass Counsel for the Petitioner(S): 1. SUBBA RAO KORRAPATI Counsel for the Respondent(S): 4 1. GP FOR HOME 2. GP FOR REVENUE 3. GP FOR PANCHAYAT RAJ RURAL DEV 4. V VINOD K REDDY (SC FOR ZP MPDO GP) The Court made the following order: Challenging the action of the respondent authorities in trying to dispossess the petitioners from the land to an extent of Ac.0.12 ½ cents in Survey No.99/2 (99/1), situated near House No.1/154 of Kambam village, Praksam District, in order to construct a Rythu Bharosa Kendram, without following due process of law, the present writ petition is filed. 2. Heard Sri Subba Rao Korrapati, learned counsel for the petitioners, Sri M. Sudheer, learned Standing Counsel for Gram Panchayat, Ms. Shane, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Home, and Ms. Naga Chandrika, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Panchayat Raj. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioners, while reiterating the contents of the affidavit, submitted that the petitioners are the absolute owners and possessors of the subject property, having acquired the same by virtue of a gift settlement deed dated 5 23.04.2008 and they are using the subject land as a cattle shed and for parking vehicles. While so, the respondent authorities, in order to construct a Rythu Bharosa Kendram, are trying to dispossess the petitioners from the subject land highhandedly. If such action is allowed, the rights of the petitioners guaranteed under the Constitution, particularly Article 300-A, would be infringed. In these circumstances, the petitioners constrained to file the present writ petition, and this Court, as an interim measure, directed the respondent authorities to maintain status quo in all respects and the same is still in force. As such, prayed to pass appropriate orders protecting the interest of the petitioners. 4. On the other hand, learned Assistant Government Pleader submitted that the document on which the petitioners are relying pertains to Survey No.99/2, but in the pleadings, he has mentioned Survey No.99/1. The petitioners are not having any right and title over the subject vacant land and, as such, no indulgence can be shown. She further submitted that there is a huge extent of land in Survey No.99/1, i.e., an extent of Ac.126.70 cents, and the construction of the Rythu Bharosa Kendra is being constructed in a different land, and not in the 6 subject land as alleged by the petitioners. As such, the writ petition is devoid of merits and prayed to dismiss the writ petition. 5. Perused the record and considered the submissions. 6. The grievance of the petitioners is that they have right and title over the land to an extent of 12½ cents in Survey No.99/2 (99/1), situated near House No.1/154 of Kambam village, Praksam District and that the respondent authorities are proposing to construct the Rythu Bharosa Kendram by dispossessing the petitioners. As rightly contended by the learned Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue, the petitioners are claiming land in Survey No.99/1, whereas the document on which the petitioners are relying shows land in Survey No.99/2. The petitioners submitted that their land is situated adjacent to the lands of neighbouring house owners in Survey No.99/2. There is some dispute with regard to the identity of the property, as the petitioners are claiming land in Sy.No.99/1 or 99/2. The petitioners themselves are not clear whether their land is situated in Sy.No.99/2 or 99/1. However, the respondent’s contention is that there is a huge extent of land in Survey No.99/1, i.e., to an extent of Ac.126.70 cents, and they are 7 constructing the Rythu Bharosa Kendram in a different land, and not in the subject land as alleged by the petitioners. 7. In the said facts and circumstances of the case, this Court, to meet the ends of justice, is inclined to dispose of the writ petition by passing the following order. “The 5th respondent-Tahsildar and the 7th respondent- Gram Panchayat shall verify on the ground and identify the extent of the petitioner’s land to an extent of 12½ cents before proceeding with the construction of the Raitu Bharosa Kendram. 8. Accordingly, the Writ petition is disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs. As a sequel thereto, interlocutory applications pending, if any in the Writ Petition, shall also stand closed. ____________________________ JUSTICE RAVI CHEEMALAPATI Date: 22.12.2025 ANS 8 275 THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE RAVI CHEEMALAPATI WRIT PETITION NO: 28195/2021 Date: 22.12.2025 ANS