APHC010513622025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3330] MONDAY,THE SIXTH DAY OF OCTOBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE TARLADA RAJASEKHAR RAO WRIT PETITION NO: 27011/2025 Between: 1. NAMMI RAJUBABU,, S/O. (LATE) GANGARAJU, AGED ABOUT 70 YEARS, OCC FARMER AND SHEEP REARING R/O. SEETHANNA AGRAHARAM VILLAGE, MAKAVARAPALEM MANDAL, ANAKAPALLI DISTRICT, A.P. PIN CODE 531113 2. NAMMI DEMUDU,, S/O. (LATE) GANGARAJU, AGED ABOUT 73 YEARS, OCC FARMER AND SHEEP REARING, R/O. D.NO.2-139, SEETHANNA AGRAHARAM VILLAGE, MAKAVARAPALEM MANDAL, ANAKAPALLI DISTRICT, A.P. PIN CODE 531113 3. NAMMI NOOKARAJU,, S/O. (LATE) GANGARAJU, AGED ABOUT 52 YEARS, OCC FARMER AND SHEEP REARING, R/O. D.NO.2-193, SEETHANNA AGRAHARAM VILLAGE, MAKAVARAPALEM MANDAL, ANAKAPALLI DISTRICT, A.P. PIN CODE 531113 4. NAMMI APPALA NAIDU,, S/O. (LATE) GANGARAJU, AGED ABOUT 46 YEARS, OCC FARMER AND SHEEP REARING, R/O. SEETHANNA AGRAHARAM VILLAGE, MAKAVARAPALEM MANDAL, ANAKAPALLI DISTRICT, A.P. PIN CODE 531113 5. NAMMI RAJUBABU,, S/O. (LATE) GANGARAJU, AGED ABOUT 60 YEARS, OCC FARMER AND SHEEP REARING, R/O. SEETHANNA AGRAHARAM VILLAGE, MAKAVARAPALEM MANDAL, ANAKAPALLI DISTRICT, A.P. PIN CODE 531113 6. NAMMI SATYAVATHI,, W/O.LOVARAJU, AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS, OCC DAILY WAGER, R/O. SEETHANNA AGRAHARAM VILLAGE, MAKAVARAPALEM MANDAL, ANAKAPALLI DISTRICT, A.P. PIN CODE 531113 7. GADADASU RAJUBABU,, S/O. (LATE) NOOKAYYA, AGED ABOUT 77 YEARS, OCC FARMER AND SHEEP REARING R/O. D.NO.2-135, SEETHANNA AGRAHARAM VILLAGE, MAKAVARAPALEM MANDAL, ANAKAPALLI DISTRICT, A.P. PIN CODE 531113 8. GADADASU MARESU,, S/O. (LATE) LACHHANNA, AGED ABOUT 70 YEARS, OCC FARMER AND SHEEP REARING R/O. SEETHANNA AGRAHARAM VILLAGE, MAKAVARAPALEM MANDAL, ANAKAPALLI DISTRICT, A.P. 2 PIN CODE 531113 9. MURUKUTTI APPALANAIDU, S/O.KARRIYYA, AGED ABOUT 64 YEARS, OCC FARMER AND SHEEP REARING R/O.D.NO.1-78, SEETHANNA AGRAHARAM VILLAGE, MAKAVARAPALEM MANDAL, ANAKAPALLI DISTRICT, A.P. PIN CODE 531113 10. MURUKUTTI KONDA BABU, S/O. (LATE) MUSILI, AGED ABOUT 66 YEARS, OCC FARMER AND SHEEP REARING, R/O.D.NO.1-123, SEETHANNA AGRAHARAM VILLAGE, MAKAVARAPALEM MANDAL, ANAKAPALLI DISTRICT, A.P. PIN CODE 531113 11. MURUKUTTI THATABBAI, S/O. (LATE) PERAYYA, AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS, OCC FARMER AND SHEEP REARING R/O.D.NO.5-64, SEETHANNA AGRAHARAM VILLAGE, MAKAVARAPALEM MANDAL, ANAKAPALLI DISTRICT, A.P. PIN CODE 531113 12. MURUKUTTI KARRI NAIDU,, S/O. (LATE) PERAYYA, AGED ABOUT 48 YEARS, OCC FARMER AND SHEEP REARING R/O.D.NO.1-123, SEETHANNA AGRAHARAM VILLAGE, MAKAVARAPALEM MANDAL, ANAKAPALLI DISTRICT, A.P. PIN CODE 531113 13. MURUKUTTI NARASMHULU,, S/O. (LATE) PERAYYA, AGED ABOUT 66 YEARS, OCC FARMER AND SHEEP REARING R/O.D.NO.2-82, SEETHANNA AGRAHARAM VILLAGE, MAKAVARAPALEM MANDAL, ANAKAPALLI DISTRICT, A.P. PIN CODE 531113 14. MURUKUTTI APPALANAIDU,, S/O. (LATE) BENNESU, AGED ABOUT 56 YEARS, OCC FARMER AND SHEEP REARING, R/O.D.NO.1-35, SEETHANNA AGRAHARAM VILLAGE, MAKAVARAPALEM MANDAL, ANAKAPALLI DISTRICT, A.P. PIN CODE 531113 15. MURUKUTTI KRISHNA,, S/O. (LATE) BENNESU, AGED ABOUT 66 YEARS, OCC FARMER AND SHEEP REARING R/O.D.NO.5-57/1, SEETHANNA AGRAHARAM VILLAGE, MAKAVARAPALEM MANDAL, ANAKAPALLI DISTRICT, A.P. PIN CODE 531113 16. MURUKUTTI KONDA BABU,, S/O. (LATE) MUSILI, AGED ABOUT 66 YEARS, OCC FARMER AND SHEEP REARING, R/O.D.NO.1-123, SEETHANNA AGRAHARAM VILLAGE, MAKAVARAPALEM MANDAL, ANAKAPALLI DISTRICT, A.P. PIN CODE 531113 17. CHAPPA AYYAPPA,, S/O. (LATE) YERRAYYA, AGED ABOUT 75 YEARS, OCC FARMER AND SHEEP REARING R/O.D.NO.1-125, SEETHANNA AGRAHARAM VILLAGE, MAKAVARAPALEM MANDAL, ANAKAPALLI DISTRICT, A.P. PIN CODE 531113 18. CHAPPA SATYANARAYANA,, S/O. AYYAPPA, AGED ABOUT 37 YEARS, OCC FARMER AND SHEEP REARING 3 R/O.D.NO.1-236, SEETHANNA AGRAHARAM VILLAGE, MAKAVARAPALEM MANDAL, ANAKAPALLI DISTRICT, A.P. PIN CODE 531113 19. CHAPPA NANAJI,, S/O.AYYAPPA, AGED ABOUT 75 YEARS, OCC FARMER AND SHEEP REARING, R/O.D.NO.1-12, SEETHANNA AGRAHARAM VILLAGE, MAKAVARAPALEM MANDAL, ANAKAPALLI DISTRICT, A.P. PIN CODE 531113 20. OMMI KALYAN KUMAR,, S/O.CHINNABBAI, AGED ABOUT 47 YEARS, OCC FARMER AND SHEEP REARING R/O.D.NO.30-118, SEETHANNA AGRAHARAM VILLAGE, MAKAVARAPALEM MANDAL, ANAKAPALLI DISTRICT, A.P. PIN CODE 531113 21. PALLA KRISHNA NAIDU,, S/O. KONDA, AGED ABOUT 56 YEARS, OCC FARMER AND SHEEP REARING R/O.D.NO.5- 66/2, SEETHANNA AGRAHARAM VILLAGE, MAKAVARAPALEM MANDAL, ANAKAPALLI DISTRICT, A.P. PIN CODE 531113 ...PETITIONER(S) AND 1. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP.BY ITS PRINCIPLE SECRETARY DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE, SECRETARIAT, VELAGAPUDI, AMARAVATHI. GUNTUR DISTRICT. 2. THE VICE CHAIRMAN AND MANAGING DIRECTOR, NREDCAP( NEW AND RENEWABLE ENERGY DEVELOPMENT - CORPORATION OF ANDHRA PRADEH LTD.), HEAD OFFICE 12-464/5/1, RIVER OAKS APARTMENT, CSR KALYANA MANDAPAM ROAD, TADEPALLI, GUNTUR DISTRICT, PIN CODE 522501. 3. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, ANAKAPALLI DISTRICT. 4. THE TAHSILDAR, MAKAVARAPALEM MANDAL, ANAKAPALLI DISTRICT 5. THE PROJECT DIRECTOR, NREDCAP, VIJAYAWADA ...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 a Writ, Order or direction more particularly one in the nature of WRIT OF MANDAMUS to declare the action of the Respondents more particularly Respondent No.2 to 5 in taking steps to dispossess the Petitioners from their agricultural land inspite of the Petitoners long standing possession for more than 70 years an extent of Ac. 12.00 in Sy.No.95 situated in Pydipala Village, Latchannapalem Gram Panchayat of Makavarapalem Mandal of Anakapalli District, without following due process of law as illegal, arbitrary, violation of Articles 14 and 21 of the Constitution of India and also violation of the provisions of the Right To Fair Compensation And Transparency In Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation And Resettlement (Andhra Pradesh Amendment) Act, 2018 and against the Principles of Natural Justice and to consequently direct 4 the Respondents not to dispossess the Petitioners from their agricultural land an extent of Ac.12.00 in Sy.No.95 situated in Pydipala Village, Latchannapalem Gram Panchayat of Makavarapalem Mandal of Anakapalli District without following the due process of law 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 pleased to direct Respondents herein not to interfere with the peaceful possession and enjoyment and not to dispossess the Petitioners in respect of land an extent of Ac.12.00 cents in Sy.No.95 situated in Pydipala Village, Latchannapalem Gram Panchayat of Makavarapalem Mandal of Anakapalli District pending disposal of the above Writ Petition Counsel for the Petitioner(S): 1. MOHANNAIR RAJEEV KUMAR Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. GP FOR REVENUE 5 THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE TARLADA RAJASEKHAR RAO WRIT PETITION No.27011 of 2025 ORDER:- The present Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking the following relief: “…Respondents more particularly Respondent No.2 to 5 in taking steps to dispossess the Petitioners from their agricultural land inspite of the petitioners long standing possession for more than 70 years an extent of Ac.12.00 in Sy.No.95 situated in Pydipala Village, Latchannapalem Gram Panchayat of Makavarapalem Mandal of Anakapalli District, without following due process of law as illegal, arbitrary, violation of Articles 14 and 21 of the Constitution of India and also violation of the provisions of the Right To Fair Compensation And Transparency In Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation And Resettlement (Andhra Pradesh Amendment) Act, 2018 and against the Principles of Natural Justice and to consequently direct the Respondents not to dispossess the Petitioners from their agricultural land an extent of Ac.12.00 in Sy.No.95 situated in Pydipala Village, Latchannapalem Gram Panchayat of Makavarapalem Mandal of Anakapalli District, without following the due process of law.…” 2. The grievance of the petitioners is that respondents are trying to dispossess the petitioners from their land in an extent of Ac.12.00 in Sy.No.95 situated at Pydipala Village, Latchannapalem Gram Panchayat of Makavarapalem Mandal of Anakapalli District, without following due process of law. The petitioners are in possession of the subject property for about 70 years and also admitted that the land belongs to the Government. 3. In Rame Gowda v. M.Varadappa Naidu,1 a three-Judge Bench of the Hon’ble Apex Court, while discussing the Indian law on the subject, observed as under: 1 (2004)1 SCC 769 6 “..It is thus clear that so far as the Indian law is concerned, the person in peaceful possession is entitled to retain his possession and in order to protect such possession he may even use reasonable force to keep out a trespasser. A rightful owner who has been wrongfully dispossessed of land may retake possession if he can do so peacefully and without the use of unreasonable force. If the trespasser is in settled possession of the property belonging to the rightful owner, the rightful owner shall have to take recourse to law.” 4. In the case of Ram Ratan and others Vs. State of Uttar Pradesh2, question cropped up before Hon’ble Supreme Court, with regard to right of private defence of trespasser against true owner. Their Lordships held that true owner has no right to dispossess the trespasser by use of force, in case trespasser was in possession in full knowledge of the true owner. Observation made by Hon'ble the Supreme Court is reproduced as under:- “In State of W.B. and others Vs Vishnunarayan and Associates (P) Ltd. and another, reported in (2002) 4 SCC 134, held that State and its executive officers cannot interfere with the rights of others except where their actions are authorized by specific provisions of law.” 5. In, H.B.Yogalaya Vs. State of U.P. and others3, the Hon’ble Apex Court held that without any show cause notice or hearing, neither demolition can take place nor a person may be dispossessed from the property, relevant portion is extracted hereunder: "Otherwise also principles of natural justice demand that a show- cause notice and hearing be given before demolishing or dispossessing a person from the properties of which he is in possession. Counsel appearing for the respondents did not contest this proposition." "It is well settled that the law requires that the true owner should dispossess the trespasser by taking recourse to the remedies under, the law." 2 (1977) 1 SCC 188 3 (2004) 13 SCC 518 7 6. In the celebrated case of Maneka Gandhi vs. Union of India4, the Hon'ble Supreme Court upheld the phrase no one shall be deprived of one’s life and liberty except procedure established by law as employed in Article 21 of the Constitution of India. The principles of natural justice demands that the persons who are affected should be heard. 7. Therefore, this Court is of the opinion that the petitioners should not be dispossessed except in accordance with the law, as held in Rame Gowda’s case (supra-1). 8. Accordingly, the Writ Petition is disposed of, directing the respondents not to interfere with the peaceful possession and enjoyment of the petitioners’ subject property, except by following due process of law. There shall be no order as to costs. As a sequel thereto, miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shall stand closed. ___________________________________ JUSTICE TARLADA RAJASEKHAR RAO Date: 06.10.2025 KBN 4 AIR 1978 SC 25