APHC010219562020 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH MONDAY, THE THIRTEENTH DAY OF OCTOBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE RAVI CHEEMALAPATI WRIT PETITION NO: Between: 1. G PAVAN KUMAR, FATHER NAME. VENKATA NARAYANA, AGE. 49, R/O. BODIGANIDODDI VILLAGE, BUKKARAYASAMUDRAM MANDAL, ANANTHAPUR DISTRICT 1. THE STATE OF AP, REP. BY ITS PRINCIPLE SECRETARY, REVENUE DEPARTMENT DISTRCT 2. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, ANANTHAPUR, ANANTHAPUR DISTRICT 3. THE REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER, ANANTHAPUR, ANANTHAPUR DISTRICT 4. THE TAHSILDAR, BUKKARASAMUDRAM MANDAL, ANANTHAPUR DISTRICT 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 an order, direction or writ, more particularly one in the nature of writ of Mandamus, declaring the action of the 3rd respondent demolishing the house and trying to interfere with the peaceful possession and enjoyment of the petitioner land in Sy.No.95 an extent of Ac.1.70 cents situated at Bodiganidoddi Village, Bukkarayasamudram Mandal, A IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) MONDAY, THE THIRTEENTH DAY OF OCTOBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE RAVI CHEEMALAPATI WRIT PETITION NO: 14457/2020 G PAVAN KUMAR, FATHER NAME. VENKATA NARAYANA, AGE. 49, R/O. BODIGANIDODDI VILLAGE, BUKKARAYASAMUDRAM MANDAL, ANANTHAPUR DISTRICT ...PETITIONER AND THE STATE OF AP, REP. BY ITS PRINCIPLE SECRETARY, REVENUE DEPARTMENT SECRETARIAT, VELAGAPUDI, GUNTUR THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, ANANTHAPUR, ANANTHAPUR THE REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER, ANANTHAPUR, ANANTHAPUR DISTRICT THE TAHSILDAR, BUKKARASAMUDRAM MANDAL, ANANTHAPUR ...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 an order, direction or writ, more particularly one in the nature declaring the action of the 3rd respondent demolishing the house and trying to interfere with the peaceful possession and enjoyment of the petitioner land in Sy.No.95 an extent of Ac.1.70 cents situated at Bodiganidoddi Village, Bukkarayasamudram Mandal, Ananthapur District and IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH [3332] MONDAY, THE THIRTEENTH DAY OF OCTOBER THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE RAVI CHEEMALAPATI G PAVAN KUMAR, FATHER NAME. VENKATA NARAYANA, AGE. 49, R/O. BODIGANIDODDI VILLAGE, BUKKARAYASAMUDRAM ...PETITIONER THE STATE OF AP, REP. BY ITS PRINCIPLE SECRETARY, SECRETARIAT, VELAGAPUDI, GUNTUR THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, ANANTHAPUR, ANANTHAPUR THE REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER, ANANTHAPUR, THE TAHSILDAR, BUKKARASAMUDRAM MANDAL, ANANTHAPUR ...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 an order, direction or writ, more particularly one in the nature declaring the action of the 3rd respondent demolishing the house and trying to interfere with the peaceful possession and enjoyment of the petitioner land in Sy.No.95 an extent of Ac.1.70 cents situated at nanthapur District and 2 trying to dispossession of the said land is illegal, arbitrary and consequently direct the respondent not to interfere with the peaceful possession and enjoyment of the petitioners land and pass IA NO: 1 OF 2020 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 the respondents not to interfere with the peaceful possession and enjoyment of the petitioner land in Sy. No. 95 an extent of Ac. 1.70 cents of Bodiganidoddi Village, Bukkarayasamudram Mandal, Ananthapuram District and pass Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. M KARIBASAIAH Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. GP FOR REVENUE 3 The Court made the following order: The case of the petitioner is that the respondent authorities, without following the due process of law, have demolished his house and are trying to dispossess him from his land to an extent of Ac.1.70 cents situated in survey No.95 of Bodiganidoddi village, Bukkarayasamudram Mandal, Ananthapur District. 2. Heard Sri M.Karibasaiah, learned counsel for the petitioner and Ms Vijayeswari, learned Assistant Government Pleader for revenue appearing for the respondents. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner, in elaboration to what has been stated in the Writ affidavit, contended that the petitioner has been in possession and enjoyment of the subject land for the last 45 years and he has constructed a house and living therein. He further contended that except the said land, the petitioner owns no other property and his entire family depends upon the said land. He further contended that the respondent authorities, without issuing any notice, demolished the subject house and trying to layout plots in order to give the same to the poor people under the ‘Navaratnalu- Pedalandariki illu’ scheme. When the petitioner approached the authorities, he was informed that the subject land belongs to the Government. He further contended that even an encroacher is also entitled to notice, but the respondent authorities, without following the due process of law, are trying to 4 dispossess him from the subject land. Hence, prayed to allow the Writ Petition. 4. On the other hand, learned Assistant Government Pleader, while placing the written instructions of the Tahsildar, Bukkarayasamudram, dated 11.10.2025 on record, contended that the Tahsildar has issued an endorsement stating that the Revenue Inspector/Village Revenue Officer conducted an enquiry and submitted a report stating that the revenue authorities are laying 43 plots in survey No.95 to an extent of Ac.1.70 cents and that there is no house on the land and it is open land. She further contended that as verified from the webland adangal, the land in survey Nos.95-1, 2 & 3 are no way concerned to the Writ Petitioner, as he is not entered either as ‘pattadar’ or ‘enjoyer’ in any of the letters in the survey No.95. She further contended that the petitioner has not placed any material to show that he is in possession and enjoyment of the subject land. As such, no indulgence need be shown on the petitioner and prayed to dismiss the Writ Petition. 5. Perused the record and considered the submissions made by learned counsel for the parties. 6. The grievance of the petitioner is that the respondent authorities, without following the due process of law, demolished his house and are trying to dispossess him from the subject land. The written instructions of the Tahsildar, Bukkarayasamudram dated 11.10.2025, indicates that the petitioner is not entered either as ‘pattadar’ or ‘enjoyer’ with regard to subject land. As 5 rightly contended by learned Assistant Government Pleader, the petitioner has not placed any piece of material showing that he is in possession of the subject land. 7. In view of the above, since the respondent authorities have disputed the petitioner’s possession over the subject property and the petitioner has not placed any material before this Court substantiating his possession, this Court, exercising its Writ jurisdiction, cannot adjudicate whether the petitioner is in possession of the subject property or not. The Writ Petition is misconceived and devoid of merits and is liable to be dismissed. 8. Accordingly, the Writ Petition is dismissed. This order does not preclude the petitioner from approaching the appropriate authority to redress his grievance. 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 13.10.2025 MP 6 92 THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE RAVI CHEEMALAPATI WRIT PETITION NO.14457 of 2020 13.10.2025 MP