APHC010183522024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3332] TUESDAY, THE TWENTY EIGHTH DAY OF OCTOBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE RAVI CHEEMALAPATI WRIT PETITION NO: 9172/2024 Between: 1. G ERRAMMA, W/O. G.SIDDAPPA, AGED ABOUT 48 YEARS, OCC AGRICULTURE R/O.HUDUGURU, H/O.HALKUR AMARAPURAM MANDAL, SRI SATYA SAI(ANANTHAPURAM) DISTRICT. ...PETITIONER AND 1. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, PANCHYATHRAJ DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT BUILDIGNS, VELAGAPUDI, AMARAVATI, GUNTUR DISTRICT. 2. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, PUTTAPARTHI, SRI SATYA SAI(ANANTHAPURAM) DISTRICT. 3. THE TASILDHAR, AMARAPURAMMANDAL, SRI SATYA SAI(ANANTHAPURAM) DISTRICT. 4. THE HALKUR GRAM PANCHAYAT, REP BY ITSPANCHAYAT SECRETARY, AMARAPURAM MANDAL, SRI SATYA SAI(ANANTHAPURAM) DISTRICT. 5. D MAHALINGAPPA, S/O. DURGAPPA, AGED 58 YEARS, R/O.H.NO.6-232, HUDUGURU, H/O.HALKURU, AMARAPURAM MANDAL, SRI SATYA SAI (ANANTHAPURAM) DISTRICT, ANDHRA PRADESH. R5 IS IMPLEADED AS PER COURT'S ORDER DT.18/12/2024 IN IA 2/2024. ...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 a writ, direction or order more particularly one in the nature of a Writ of Mandamus, declaring the action of the Respondents and their personnel without following the due process of law attempting to lay the road across the petitioners Subject Land Ac. 4-73 cents in Sy.No.295-4 of Huduguru, H/o. Halkur, AmarapuramMandal, Sri SatyaSai District.(Erstwhile Ananthapuram District) without following the provisions of The Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013 (Act 30 of 2013) and Rules is illegal, arbitrary and violation of principles of Natural Justice besides violative of Articles 21, 300-A of the Constitution of India and consequently direct the Respondents to not to lay the road across the petitioners Subject Land Ac. 4-73 cents in Sy.No. 295- 4 of Huduguru, H/o. Halkur, Amarapuram Mandal, Sri Satya Sai District.(Erstwhile Ananthapuram District), and pass such IA NO: 1 OF 2024 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 may be pleased to direct the Respondents to not to lay the road across the petitioner’s Subject Land Ac. 4-73 cents in Sy.No. 295-4 of Huduguru, H/o. Halkur, Amarapuram Mandal, Sri Satya Sai District.(Erstwhile Ananthapuram District) without following the provisions of The Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013 (Act 30 of 2013) and Rules thereon and pass such IA NO: 2 OF 2024 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 permit the petitioner/proposed respondent No.5 to come on record as party respondent no.5 in W.P.No.9172/2024 as well as interlocutory applications 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 to vacate the interim order dated 23.04.2024 passed in WP.No.9172 of 2024 and dismiss the writ petition and pass IA NO: 2 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 to grant leave and permit the petitioner/respondent no.5 to file counter affidavit and pass IA NO: 3 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 to vacate the interim order dt.23-04-2024 passed in W.P.No.9172/2024 by dismissing the writ petition and pass Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. O UDAYA KUMAR Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. GP FOR REVENUE 2. GP FOR PANCHAYAT RAJ RURAL DEV 3. D KODANDARAMI REDDY 4. Mattegunta.Sudhir,Standing Counsel For Z.P.Ps,M.P.Ps,Gram Panchayats The Court made the following order: This writ petition was filed aggrieved by the action of the respondents in laying road across the petitioner’s subject land admeasuring Ac.4.73 cents in Sy.No.295-4 of Huduguru, H/o Halkur, Amarapuram Mandal, Sri Satya Sai district without following due process of law. 2. Heard Sri O.Udaya Kumar, learned counsel for the petitioner, Miss K.Vijayeswari, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue, Sri D.Kondandarami Reddy, learned counsel for 5th respondent, Sri M.Sudheer, learned Standing counsel for Gram Panchayat. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner while reiterating the contents of the writ affidavit contended that, the subject land was assigned to the petitioner by the government and she is eking out her livelihood by doing agriculture activities in the subject land. He further submitted that, in order to provide road to reach the 5th respondent fields, the respondent authorities are trying to lay road across the petitioner’s subject land without issuing any notice and without following due process of law. If such action is materialized, the rights of the petitioner will be affected and her livelihood would be at stake. As such prayed to pass appropriate orders protecting the interest of the petitioner. 4. On the contrary, Sri Kondandarami Reddy, learned counsel for the 5th respondent on counter submitted that, the 5th respondent had made a representation through spandana dated 18.12.2023 stating that petitioner and some others are objecting the rastha to his land and further requested to show rastha to his lands situated in Sy.No.297-1. He further submitted that as there are disputes between the petitioner and the 5th respondent, proclamation order under Section 145 of Cr.P.C. were imposed on 15.03.2024. Inspite of the same, the petitioner has planted some trees and also started agricultural activities on the road which leads to Sy.No.295-4 making it unable to cultivate the 5th respondent’s land. Accordingly prayed to pass appropriate orders in that regard. 5. Whereas, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue on counter submitted that upon the representation made by the 5th respondent requesting to show rastha to his land in Sy.No. 297-1, the officials concerned have inspected the disputed land. Whenever the revenue authorities visited the land both parties were quarrelling and not cooperating with the enquiry officers to settle their rastha dispute creating law and order problem in the village. She further submitted that upon the directions of higher authorties, Mandal Surveyor and other authorities have visited the disputed land on 28.03.2024 and shown the cart track in Sy.No.295-4 beside the old rastha and planted stones on the field. She further submitted that, as per the enquiries made in the village, it was found that, already there exists a ‘rastha’ along the border in Sy.No.294-2 which is existing through Sy.No.296-7, Sy.No.292-2 and there are traces of its usage. She further submitted that as per condition no.06 of the grant given to the petitioner, the grantee (petitioner) shall not obstruct the existing customary rights of the Government and the public in respect of the roads, footpaths, streams canals and sewers on around the land. Inspite of it, the petitioner is obstructing and preventing the 5th respondent (adjacent to the petitioner) and others from reaching their lands for cultivation purpose by putting thorny bushes and trenched the said rastha. As such no indulgence need be shown on the petitioner and the writ petition is devoid of merits and liable to be dismissed and accordingly prayed to dismiss the writ petition. 6. Perused the record and considered the submissions of learned counsel for the respective parties. 7. As could be culled out from the facts of the case, the dispute is with regard to the rastha to be provided to approach the fields of 5th respondent (adjacent to the petitioner’s land). The contention of the petitioner is that, in order to provide road to reach the 5th respondent’s field, the respondents are high-handed laying road across the petitioner’s subject land without following due process of law. Whereas the contents of the counters would show that the respondents are not forming any new rastha, already there exists a rastha which is in usage and the petitioner is obstructing the said rastha by trenching it and putting thorny bushes thereby preventing others including 5th respondent from reaching their fields for cultivation. This court is not inclined to go into the aspect whether the petitioner is obstructing the said rastha. Instead, to put a quietus to the said dispute, this court is inclined to pass the following directions: (i) The Tahsildar is directed to survey the petitioner’s subject land as per assignment proceedings and to identify and fix the boundaries to show an existing proper rastha to approach the fields of 5th respondent. (ii) If it is found that the petitioner has obstructed or planted any trees in the public rastha (other than her land), the respondent authorities concerned shall take steps in removing the same within a period of eight(08) weeks. (iii) It is needless to observe that all the parties concerned shall cooperate with the Tahsildar’s survey. (iv) If at all the respondents have to form a new rastha or approach road through petitioner’s subject land, they shall follow due process of law. With the above directions, the writ petition is disposed of. No costs. Miscellaneous applications, pending if any, shall stand closed. ________________________ JUSTICE RAVI CHEEMALAPATI BRS