::1:: APHC010495172025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3208] FRIDAY,THE SEVENTH DAY OF NOVEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE D RAMESH WRIT PETITION NO: 26119/2025 Between: 1.KODURU BUJJAMMA, W/O KHADHAR BASHA, AGED ABOUT 37 YEARS, R/O VENKATESWARAPALEM BIT-LL, KODURU PANCHAYATH, T.P.GUDUR MANDAL, SPSR NELLORE DISTRICT. ...PETITIONER AND 1.THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, REVENUE DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT BUILDINGS, VELAGAPUDI, AMARAVATHI,GUNTUR DISTRICT. 2.THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, NELLORE, SPSR NELLORE DISTRICT. 3.THE TAHSILDAR, T.P.GUDUR MANDAL, T.P.GUDUR SPSR NELLORE DISTRICT. 4.THE SUBINSPECTOR OF POLICE, THOTAPALLI GUDUR POLICE STATION, THOTAPALLI GUDUR, SPSR NELLORE DISTRICT. 5.AVULA MUNIRATNAM, S/O RAMAKRISHNA, AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS R/O R/O VENKATESWARAPALEM BIT-LL, KODURU PANCHAYATH, T.P.GUDUR MANDAL, SPSR NELLORE DISTRICT. ...RESPONDENT(S): ::2:: This Court made the following ORDER: This Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India by the Petitioners for the following relief: “.. to issue a Writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus, declaring the action of the 3rd respondent in not considering the representation dt.8-9-2025 of the petitioner and not taking action for eviction of 5th respondent from the house plot allotted to the petitioner vide No.RC(B)1683/2016 dated 25-9-2017 as illegal and arbitrary and consequently direct the 3 respondent to consider the representation dated 8-9-2025 submitted y the petitioner and take action for eviction of 5th respondent from the house plot allotted to the petitioner vide No.RC(B)1683/2016 dated 25- 9-2017, and pass such…’ 2. The grievance of the petitioner is that the 3rd respondent has failed to consider the representation of the petitioner dated 08.09.2025, wherein the petitioner sought eviction of the 5th respondent/unofficial respondent, who has allegedly encroached upon and illegally occupied the petitioner’s house. 3. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Government Pleader for Revenue appearing for the respondents. 4. Considering the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioner, and in view of the nature of the claim made by the petitioner, ::3:: this Court is of the considered view that the dispute between the petitioner and the 5th respondent/unofficial respondent is purely a civil in nature. Accordingly, the Writ Petition is dismissed, granting liberty to the petitioner to approach the competent civil court for appropriate relief, including eviction of the 5th respondent, who is alleged to have illegally occupied the subject property. No costs. As a sequel, interlocutory applications if any pending, shall stand closed. ________________________ JUSTICE D. RAMESH Dt:07.11.2025 klk ::4:: THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE D RAMESH WRIT PETITION No.26119 of 2025 Dt:07.11.2025 krk 107