APHC010299202023 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3332] FRIDAY,THE FIFTH DAY OF DECEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE RAVI CHEEMALAPATI WRIT PETITION NO: 15460/2023 Between: 1. MEDASANI GURUKUMAR CHOWDARY, S/O LATE MEDASANI VENKATARAMANA NAIDU, AGED ABOUT 72 YEARS, OCC. AGRICULTURE, RESIDING AT C. MALLAVARAM VILLAGE, TIRUPATI RURAL MANDAL, TIRUPATI DISTRICT. 2. MEDASANI ANANDA NAIDU,, S/O LATE MEDASANI VENKATARAMANA NAIDU, AGED ABOUT 69 YEARS, OCC. CULTIVATION, RESIDING AT C. MALLAVARAM VILLAGE, TIRUPATI RURAL MANDAL, TIRUPATI DISTRICT. ...PETITIONER(S) AND 1. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY PANCHAYAT RAJ AND RURAL DEVELOPMENT, SECRETARIAT BUILDINGS, VELAGAPUDI, AMARAVATHI. 2. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP. BY IT'S PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, (REVENUE), SECRETARIAT, AMARAVATHI, GUNTUR DISTRICT. 3. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, TIRUPATI, TIRUPATI DISTRICT. 4. THE REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER, TIRUPATI, TIRUPATI DISTRICT. 2 5. THE TAHSILDAR, TIRUPATI RURAL MANDAL, TIRUPATI DISTRICT. 6. THE VICE CHAIRMAN, TIRUPATI URBAN DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY (TUDA), TIRUPATI, TIRUPATI DISTRICT. 7. THE MANDAL PARISHAD DEVELOPMENT OFFICER, TIRUPATI RURAL MANDAL, TIRUPATI DISTRICT. 8. THE PANCHAYAT SECRETARY, C. MALLAVARAM GRAMA PANCHAYAT, TIRUPATI RURAL, TIRUPATI DISTRICT. 9. THE SARPANCH, C. MALLAVARAM GRAMA PANCHAYAT, TIRUPATI RURAL, TIRUPATI DISTRICT. ...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 IA NO: 1 OF 2023 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 No. 6, 8 and 9 not to interfere with the petitioners lands without following due process of law pending disposal of the Writ Petition and pass such IA NO: 2 OF 2023 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 No. 3 to 5 to protect the "Government Kalva Porambokulanda" an extent of Ac.1.50 cents situated in Sy.No.49/1 and 49/3 of C. Mallavarm Village, Tirupati Rural Mandal, Tirupati District bounded East - S.No.50 (kaluva poramboke); West - S.No.49 Kaluva - presently fenced Muslim Burial Ground; North - patta land in S.No.59/5 (M.Lalitha, W/o Gurukumar Chowdary); South - S.No.46(Government Land) which is classified as "Government Kalva Poramboku" pending disposal of the Writ Petition and pass such 3 Counsel for the Petitioner(S): 1. O UDAYA KUMAR Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. VENKATA REDDY GAJJALA SC FOR ZPP, MPP, AND GRAM PANCHAYAT 2. GP FOR REVENUE 3. GP FOR PANCHAYAT RAJ RURAL DEV 4. Karri kalyan Durga Prasad SC FOR TUDA The Court made the following: 4 ORDER: Declaring the action of the respondents in interfering with the peaceful possession and enjoyment of the petitioners respective land to an extent of Ac.1.50 cents situated in Sy.No.49/1 and 49/3 of C.Mallavaram Village, Tirupati Rural Mandal, Tirupati District, without issuing any notice and following due process of law, as illegal and arbitrary, the present writ petition is filed. 2. Heard Sri O.Udaya Kumar, learned counsel for the petitioners, Sri Mattegunta Sudhir, learned Standing Counsel for Gram Panchayat, Smt.Naga Chandrika, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Panchayat Raj for the respondents. 3. Learned Standing Counsel for Gram Panchayat on counter contended that the petitioner is not in possession of the subject land and the respondents are not interfering with the same, accordingly, prayed to pass appropriate orders. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner prayed to record the said submission and dispose of the writ petition. 5. Perused the record and considered the submissions made by the learned counsel. 5 6. Respondents interference with their peaceful possession and enjoyment over the subject property without following law is the grievance of the petitioners. This Court on 04.07.2023 granted interim order directing respondent Nos.6, 8 & 9 not to interfere with the subject property without following due process of law. The counter filed by the respondents has been placed on record across the bench. A perusal of the counter filed by the Gram Panchayat would indicate that the respondents have given contradictory statements. At one breadth, they have stated that the petitioners are not in possession of the subject property, as such, the question of dispossession does not arise and at another breadth, they have stated that they never tried to dispossess the petitioners from the subject property much less on 01.06.2023. However, the material placed on record indicates that the petitioners got the subject property by way of lease for planting trees. Once the license has been granted for planting trees in the Government Poramboke, it is for the respondents to show that the possession was taken from the petitioners. No substantial evidence/material was placed on record to show that possession has been taken from the petitioners. In view of the same, this Court is inclined to dispose of the writ petition by passing the following order: “The respondents are directed not to interfere with the subject property except under due process of law.” 6 7. Accordingly, the Writ Petition is disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs. As a sequel, miscellaneous applications, pending if any, shall stand closed. _____________________________ JUSTICE RAVI CHEEMALAPATI Date: 05th December, 2025 RKS