::1:: APHC010304802020 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3329] TUESDAY,THE FOURTEENTH DAY OF OCTOBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE VENKATESWARLU NIMMAGADDA WRIT PETITION NO: 20162/2020 Between: 1. K VENKATAMUNI, S/O, GANGULAIAH, AGE 51 YEARS, OCCAGICULTURE R/O SORAKAYALAPALEM VILLAGE, RAMACHANDRAPURAM MANDAL, CHITTOOR DISTRICT. 2. K. GANGAIAH,, S/O GANGULAIAH, AGE 48 YEARS, OCCAGRICULTURE R/O SORAKAYALAPALEM VILLAGE, RAMACHANDRAPURAM MANDAL, CHITTOOR DISTRICT. 3. K. CHANDRABABU, S/O GANGULAIAH, AGE 45 YEARS, OCC AGRICULTURE R/O SORAKAYALAPALEM VILLAGE, RAMACHANDRAPURAM MANDAL, CHITTOOR DISTRICT. ...PETITIONER(S) AND 1. THE STATE OF AP, REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, REVENUE DEPARTMENT, VELAGAPUDI, AMARAVATHI. 2. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, CHITTOOR DISTRICT, CHITTOOR. 3. THE REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER, CHITTOOR, CHITTOOR DISTRICT 4. THE THAHASILDAR, RAMACHANDRAPURAM MANDAL, RAMACHANDRAPURAM CHITTOOR DISTRICT. 5. THE SORAKAYALAPALEM GRAMAPANCHAYAT, REP.BY ITS PANCHAYAT SECRETARY, SORAKAYALAPALEM, RAMACHANDRAPURAM 2 MANDAL, CHITTOOR DISTRICT. 6. THE KAMMAPALEM GRAMAPANCHAYAT, REP.BY ITS PANCHAYAT SECRETARY, KAMMAPALEM, RAMACHANDRAPURAM MANDAL, CHITTOOR DISTRICT 7. THE K K VENKATAPURAM GRAMAPANCHAYAT, REP.BY ITS PANCHAYAT SECRETARY, K.K. VENKATAPURAM, RAMACHANDRAPURAM MANDAL, CHITTOOR DISTRICT. ...RESPONDENT(S): This Court made the following ORDER: 1. This writ petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking the following relief: “..to issue a writ order or direction more particularly one in the nature of writ of mandamus declaring the impugned action of the respondents to interfere with the peaceful possession and enjoyment of the petitioners land situated in Sy.No.106/1 Sorakayalapalem village, amachanedrapuram Mandal, Chittoor district in an extent of 879.99 sq.yards by seeking to construct a village secretariat as being illegal arbitrary and violation of rights guaranteed under Article 14, 21 and 300-A of the Constitution of India and pass...” 2. Even though the matter was posted under the caption for dismissal, there is no representation for the petitioner. 3. Heard the learned Standing counsel for the respondent Nos.5 to 7. 3. The case of the petitioner is that the petitioner is in peaceful possession and enjoyment of the subject land admeasuring for an 3 extent of 879.99 square yards in Sy.No.106/1, situated at Sorakayalapalem Village, Ramachandrapuram Mandal, Chittoor District. It is alleged that, without following the due procedure as contemplated under law, the respondent authorities are interfering with the petitioner’s peaceful possession and enjoyment of the subject land and they are trying to construct a Village Secretariat therein. Hence the writ petition. 4. The learned Standing Counsel for the respondent Nos.5 to 7, Gram Panchayat, furnished written instructions on behalf of the respondents, wherein it is stated that no Village Secretariat building has been constructed at Sy.No.106/1, situated at Sorakayalapalem Village, Ramachandrapuram Mandal, Chittoor District, as alleged by the petitioner till date. If the respondents are still proposing for construction of the same, they would follow due process of law and principles of natural justice. 5. Considering the submissions made by the learned Standing Counsel for the respondent Nos.5 to 7 and on perusal of the material available on record, in view of the written instructions submitted by the learned Standing Counsel for the respondents as stated supra, it is admitted clear and categorically that the respondent authorities 4 did not interfere with the petitioner’s peaceful possession and enjoyment of the subject land till date, and no construction of a Village Secretariat building was undertaken in Sy.No.106/1, as alleged by the petitioner. Therefore, no cause of action with respect to interference or dispossession survives for further adjudication, as it is only an apprehension of the petitioner. Hence, no further orders are necessary in the given facts and circumstances of the present Writ Petition. As admitted, if there is any proposal for construction at the subject site, the respondents shall follow due process of law. Accordingly, the Writ Petition is dismissed. No costs. As a sequel, interlocutory applications if any pending, shall stand closed. _____________________________________ JUSTICE VENKATESWARLU NIMMAGADDA 14.10.2025 klk 5 53 THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE VENAKTESWARLU NIMMAGADDA WRIT PETITION NO.20162 of 2020 14.10.2025 klk