APHC010709122025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3333] FRIDAY,THE TWENTY SIXTH DAY OF DECEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE V.SUJATHA WRIT PETITION NO: 36312/2025 Between: 1. J. SUBBARAO,, S/O. J. MUSALAIAH, AGED ABOUT 80 YEARS, OCC BUSINESS, RIO. MIG, 1B-30, D. NO. 2-10-2, MVP COLONY, NEAR SAMATHA COLLEGE, VISAKHAPATNAM TOWN, VISAKHAPATNAM DISTRICT - 532 005. 2. JANGA DINAKAR,, S/O. J. SUBBA RAO, AGED ABOUT 47 YEARS, OCC PRIVATE EMPLOYEE, R/O. H. NO.40/HIG, 12-10-228, BHARAT NAGAR, VTC MOOSAPETA, BALANAGAR, MEDCHAL - MALKAJGIRI PIN 500018 ...PETITIONER(S) AND 1. STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, (MUNICIPAL ADMINISTRATION DEPARTMENT), SECRETARIAT BUILDINGS, VELAGAPUDI, GUNTUR DISTRICT. 2. THE COMMISSIONER, GREATER VISAKHAPATNAM MUNICIPAL CORPORATION, VISAKHAPATNAM DISTRICT. 3. THE ASST CITY PLANNER, ZONE - 2, GREATER VISAKHAPATNAM MUNICIPAL CORPORATION, VISAKHAPATNAM DISTRICT. 4. THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, ZONE -2, GREATER VISAKHAPATNAM MUNICIPAL CORPORATION, VISAKHAPATNAM 2 VS,J W.P.No.36312 of 2025 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 topleased to issue a writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of mandamus declaring the action of the Respondents No. 3 and 4 not to dispossess the petitioners from the land admeasuring an extent of 719 aq. yards (i.e. an extent of 355 Sq. Yards Plot No.2 and 364 Sq. Yds, Plot No.3 respectively) situated Sy. No. 3/1, Adivivaram, Vishakhapatnam Town and District, as illegal, arbitrary, violation of principles of natural justice and violative article 14, 21 and 300-A of the Constitution of India and contrary to the provision of Right to fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013 and rules made thereunder consequently direct the respondents no. 2 to 4 not to interfere in the above said subject land 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 the Respondents No. 3 and 4 not to dispossess the petitioner from the land admeasuring an extent of 719 aq. yards (i.e. an extent of 355 Sq. Yards Plot No.2 and 364 Sq. Yds, Plot No.3 respectively) situated Sy. No. 3/1, Adivivaram, Vishakhapatnam Town and District, pending disposal of the main writ petition Counsel for the Petitioner(S): 1. BONU RAMA SHANKAR RAO Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. GP MUNCIPAL ADMN AND URBAN DEV AP The Court made the following: 3 VS,J W.P.No.36312 of 2025 ORDER: The present Writ Petition came to be filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking the following relief:- “….to issue a writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of mandamus declaring the action of the Respondents No. 3 and 4 not to dispossess the petitioners from the land admeasuring an extent of 719 aq. yards (i.e. an extent of 355 Sq. Yards Plot No.2 and 364 Sq. Yds, Plot No.3 respectively) situated Sy. No. 3/1, Adivivaram, Vishakhapatnam Town and District, as illegal, arbitrary, violation of principles of natural justice and violative article 14, 21 and 300-A of the Constitution of India and contrary to the provision of Right to fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013 and rules made thereunder consequently direct the respondents no. 2 to 4 not to interfere in the above said subject land….” 2. The petitioners herein are the absolute owners and possessors of the house sites admeasuring 719 square yards situated in Sy.No.3/1, Adivivaram, Visakhapatnam having purchased the same through registered sale deed document Nos.13317/1983 and 13316/1983. Ever since, the petitioners have been in peaceful possession of the said property. 3. While the matter stood thus, on 24.12.2025, the respondent Nos.3 and 4 are alleged to have visited the subject property and have threatened the petitioners to vacate the subject land, without there being any prior notice or by following the due procedure of law contemplated under law. Aggrieved by the said action of the respondents, the present writ petition is filed. 4 VS,J W.P.No.36312 of 2025 4. Heard Sri. B. Rama Shankara Rao, learned counsel for the petitioners and Sri. A.S.C. Bose, learned Standing Counsel for the respondents. 5. Today when the writ petition came up for hearing, learned Standing Counsel, on oral instructions stated that the respondent authorities have only visited the subject land as a part and parcel of process of the master plan. He further submitted that respondent Nos.3 and 4 have only requested the petitioners to handover the subject land on receiving compensation as per law, but have not interfered with their possession. 6. Recording the said submission, this Court, instead of going into the merits of the case, feels it appropriate to dispose of the writ petition by directing the respondent authorities not to interfere with the peaceful possession of the petitioners over the subject property, without following due process of law. 7. In the result, this writ petition is disposed of and the respondent authorities are directed not to interfere with the possession of the petitioners over the subject land admeasuring 719 square yards situated in Sy.No.3/1, Adivivaram, Visakhapatnam town and district, without following due process of law. There shall be no order as to costs. 5 VS,J W.P.No.36312 of 2025 Consequently, Miscellaneous Petitions, if any, pending in this Petition shall stand closed. ____________________ JUSTICE V.SUJATHA 26.12.2025 Gss