APHC010055132018 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3209] TUESDAY,THE FOURTH DAY OF NOVEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE NINALA JAYASURYA WRIT PETITION NO: 2482/2018 Between: 1. MANDAM SRINU,, R/O. TIRUMALAPURAM VILLAGE, JANGAREDDYGUDEM MANDAL, WEST GODAVARI DISTRICT. 2. CHAVALA JHANSI, D/O. MOHANA RAO, AGED 25 YEARS. R/O. TIRUMALAPURAM VILLAGE, JANGAREDDYGUDEM MANDAL, WEST GODAVARI DISTRICT 3. GOPI JYOTHI,, W/O. GOPI YOHAN, AGED 30 YEARS. R/O. TIRUMALAPURAM VILLAGE, JANGAREDDYGUDEM MANDAL, WEST GODAVARI DISTRICT 4. JONNAKUTI SAYAMMA,, W/O. PRASAD, AGED 35 YEARS. R/O. TIRUMALAPURAM VILLAGE, JANGAREDDYGUDEM MANDAL, WEST GODAVARI DISTRICT 5. SETTIMALA RAJESWARI,, W/O. KRISHNA, AGED 28 YEARS. R/O. TIRUMALAPURAM VILLAGE, JANGAREDDYGUDEM MANDAL, WEST GODAVARI DISTRICT 6. GOPI SRIDEVI,, W/O. SRINU, AGED 38 YEARS. R/O. TIRUMALAPURAM VILLAGE, JANGAREDDYGUDEM MANDAL, WEST GODAVARI DISTRICT 7. KONALA NAGALAKSHMI,, W/O. BALAKRISHNA, AGED 27 YEARS. R/O. TIRUMALAPURAM VILLAGE, JANGAREDDYGUDEM MANDAL, WEST GODAVARI DISTRICT 8. MANUKONDA MARIMAMMA,, W/O. RAMAKRISHNA, AGED 37 YEARS. R/O. TIRUMALAPURAM VILLAGE, JANGAREDDYGUDEM NJS,J W.P No.2482 of 2018 2 MANDAL, WEST GODAVARI DISTRICT 9. MANUKONDA GANGARATNAM,, W/O. NAGA SUBBARAO, AGED 35 YEARS. R/O. TIRUMALAPURAM VILLAGE, JANGAREDDYGUDEM MANDAL, WEST GODAVARI DISTRICT 10. MANUKONDA VIJAYA,, W/O. DHANARAJU, AGED 28 YEARS. R/O. TIRUMALAPURAM VILLAGE, JANGAREDDYGUDEM MANDAL, WEST GODAVARI DISTRICT 11. PALLI GANGARATHNAM,, W/O. RAJU, AGED 30 YEARS. R/O. TIRUMALAPURAM VILLAGE, JANGAREDDYGUDEM MANDAL, WEST GODAVARI DISTRICT 12. MANELLI MANGA,, W/O. VEERA VENKATARAO, AGED 30 YEARS. R/O. TIRUMALAPURAM VILLAGE, JANGAREDDYGUDEM MANDAL, WEST GODAVARI DISTRICT 13. PALLAPATI INDIRA,, W/O. SRINIVASA RAO, AGED 30 YEARS. R/O. TIRUMALAPURAM VILLAGE, JANGAREDDYGUDEM MANDAL, WEST GODAVARI DISTRICT ...PETITIONER(S) AND 1. STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY (REVENUE) SECRETARIAT BUILDINGS, VELAGAPUDI. GUNTUR DISTRICT. 2. DISTRICT COLLECTOR, DISTRICT COLLECTOR, WEST GODAVARI DISTRICT, ELURU 3. TAHSILDAR, JANGAREDDYGUDEM MANDAL. WEST GODAVARI DISTRICT. 4. VILLAGE REVENUE OFFICER, TIRUMALAPURAM REVENUE VILLAGE, JANGAREDDYGUDEM MANDAL, WEST GODAVARI DISTRICT. 5. STATION HOUSE OFFICER, JANGAREDDYGUDEM POLICE STATION WEST GODAVARI DISTRICT. ...RESPONDENT(S): NJS,J W.P No.2482 of 2018 3 Counsel for the Petitioner(S): 1. RAMBABU KOPPINEEDI Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. GP FOR HOME (AP) 2. GP FOR ASSIGNMENT (AP) 3. GP FOR REVENUE (AP) NJS,J W.P No.2482 of 2018 4 The Court made the following Order: The writ petition is filed aggrieved by the alleged action of the respondents in summoning the petitioners to the office of the Tahsildar and police station and directing them to vacate the house sites in Tirumalapuram Village, Jangareddy Gudem Mandal, West Godavari District and at most to remove the thatched huts in which the petitioners are living as illegal, unconstitutional and for the consequential directions. 2. The learned counsel for the petitioners made submissions with reference to the averments made in the affidavit filed in support of the writ petition to the effect that the petitioners are agricultural labours and living in Tirumalapuram Revenue Village in Survey No. 243/1, 243/2 and 243/3, which is recorded as Grama Kantham in the Revenue Survey Records (RSR) by erecting small huts/thatched houses. He submits that on the earlier occasion, when the Revenue Authorities were trying to interfering with the petitioners’ possession and enjoyment, they have filed W.P No.28060 of 2017 and the same was disposed of, with a direction to work out remedies available in law against private persons by an order dated 24.08.2017. Be that as it may. 3. The learned counsel submits that as there was highhanded attempt on behalf of the respondents in trying to remove the thatched huts in which the petitioners are living, without following any due procedure contemplated under law, the present writ petition is filed. He seeks appropriate directions in the facts and circumstances of the case. 4. On the other hand, Mr. K Arjun Chowdary, learned Assistant Government Pleader made submissions by drawing the attention of this Court to the counter-affidavit filed by the respondent No.3. Referring to certain factual aspects set out therein to which no reply-affidavit is filed, he submits that in fact after considering the eligibility of the writ petitioners out of 13, 9 writ petitioners were provided house sites in Ac.0.01 ½ cents each in R.S No.243/1 of Tirumalapuram Village. He submits that remaining 4 writ NJS,J W.P No.2482 of 2018 5 petitioners i.e., Serial Nos.9 to 12 are residing with their parents house in Tirumalapuram Village, they are not eligible for allotment of house sites. He submits that in view of the allotment of alternative house sites to the eligible writ petitioners, the writ petition may be dismissed. 5. Considering the submissions made and more particularly with reference to the allotment of alternative house sites to the eligible writ petitioners, this Court deems it not necessary to examine the matter in detail more particularly, Grievance of most of the writ petitioners does not require any adjudication. In so far as the petitioner Nos.9 to 12, it appears that their cases were not considered for allotment of house sites as they are not eligible for allotment. If any proceedings are communicated to them rejecting their request for allotment of house sites, they may work out their remedies in accordance with law. 6. With the above observations, this Writ Petition is closed. No costs. Miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shall stand closed. __________________________ JUSTICE NINALA JAYASURYA Date:04.11.2025 Ksj