APHC010515282025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3332] TUESDAY,THE TWENTY FIFTH DAY OF NOVEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE RAVI CHEEMALAPATI WRIT PETITION NO: 26546/2025 Between: 1. TELUGUNTA SURYANARAYANA, S/O VENKATARAMANA, AGED ABOUT 60 YEARS, PALTHERU VILLAGE, PAYAKARAOPETA RNANDAL, ANAKAPALLI DISTRICT ANDHRA PRADESH. ...PETITIONER AND 1. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP. BY THE PRINCIPAL,SECRETARY, PANCHAYATRAJ DEPARTMENT SECRETARIAT, AMARAVATHI. GUNTUR DISTRICT. 2. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, ANAKAPALLI, ANAKAPALLI DISTRICT. 3. REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER, ANAKAPALLI, ANAKAPALLI DISTRICT. ' 4. DISTRICT PANCHAYAT OFFICERDPO, ANAKAPALLI, ANAKAPALLI DISTRICT. 5. THE TAHSILDAR, PAYAKAROAPETA, PAYAKAROAPETA MANDAL. 6. THE PANCHAYAT SECRETARY, PALTERU VILLAGE, PAYAKAROAPETA MANDAL CIRCLE INSPECTOR. 7. STATION HOUSE OFFICER, PAYAKAROAPETA S 8. RI KEDARSETTY VEERAVENKATA SATYANARAYANA, S/O. NAGESWARAO, PALTERU VILLAGE, PAYAKAROPETA, ANAKAPALLI DISTRICT. 2 9. TELUGUNTA VENKATA NARASIMHARAO, S/O. VENKAIAH, PALTERU VILLAGE, PAYAKAROPETA, ANAKAPALLI 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 to issue a Writ of Mandamus, or any that this Hon’ble Court may other appropriate writ, order, or direction, declaring the action of Respondents attempting to interfere with or dispossess the petitioner from his land in Survey No, 138/6, admeasuring Ac. 0.55 cents, situated in Paltheru Village, Payakaraopeta Mandal, Anakapalli District, at the behest of the unofficial and without following the due process of unconstitutional, and consequently direct the said 3 to 7 in respondents, without issuing notice law, as illegal, arbitrary, and interfere with the petitioners peaceful possession and respondents not to enjoyment of the said property and to pass 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 to Direct Respondents 3 to 9’not to interfere with the petitioners peaceful possession and enjoyment of the land in Sun.By No. 138/6, Ac. 0.55 cents, in any manner, without following due process of law, and to pass Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. ANCHA PANDURANGA RAO Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. GP FOR REVENUE 2. GP FOR PANCHAYAT RAJ RURAL DEV 3. GP FOR PANCHAYAT RAJ RURAL DEV The Court made the following: 3 ORDER: Declaring the action of the official respondent Nos.3 to 7 in trying to dispossess the petitioner from his land to an extent of Ac.0.55 cents in Sy.No.138/6 situated in Paltheru Village, Payakaraopeta Mandal, Anakapalli District, without following due process of law, as illegal and arbitrary, the present writ petition is filed. 2. Heard Sri Bhooma Maharshi Reddy, learned counsel representing learned counsel for the petitioner, Sri Y.Koteswara Rao, learned Standing Counsel for Gram Panchayat and Smt.Naga Chandrika, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Panchayat Raj for the respondents. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner while reiterating the contents of the affidavit contended that the petitioner is the absolute owner and possessor of the subject land for which the revenue authorities had issued pattas in his favour and entered his name in the revenue records. While so, when the respondent authorities, in a manner unknown to law tried to interfere with the petitioner’s subject land high handedly, the petitioner approached this Court by way of this writ petition and this Court, on 25.09.2025, granted an order of status quo. He further contended that, till today, the respondents have not filed counter, as such, prayed to pass appropriate orders treating interim orders as final orders. 4. On the other hand, learned Standing Counsel sought time to get instructions. 4 5. Perused the record and considered the submissions made by the learned counsel. 6. This Court, on 25.09.2025, by duly taking into consideration the material available on record i.e., title documents and pattadar passbook, granted an order of status quo. The grievance of the petitioner is that the respondents are highhandedly interfering with his possession without following law. Despite granting sufficient time, respondents neither filed counter nor brought any written instructions. As the relief sought is innocuous, there is no purpose in keeping the writ petition pending inviting counter, as such; this Court is inclined to dispose of the writ petition basing on the material available on record by passing the following order: “The respondents are directed not to interfere with the petitioner’s subject land except under due process of law.” 7. Accordingly, the Writ Petition is disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs. As a sequel, miscellaneous applications, pending if any, shall stand closed. _____________________________ JUSTICE RAVI CHEEMALAPATI Date: 25th November, 2025 RKS