1 APHC010617522025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3208] MONDAY,THE TWENTY NINETH DAY OF DECEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE D RAMESH WRIT PETITION NO: 31812/2025 Between: 1. KARRI RAJULA NAIDU, S/O LATE K.YERUKU NAIDU, AGE 75 YRS, OCC SENIOR CITIZEN, R/O D.NO.1-343, ASAKAPALLI VILLAGE AND POST, SABBAVARAM MANDAL, ANAKAPALLI DISTRICT. ...PETITIONER AND 1. THE STATE OF AP, REP. BY ITS PRI.SEC TO GOVT, REVENUE DEPT, SECRETARIAT, VELAGAPUDI, AMARAVATHI, GUNTUR DISTRICT. 2. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, ANAKAPALLI DISTRICT, AT ANAKAPALLI. 3. THE REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER, ANAKAPALLI REVENUE DIVISION, ANAKAPALLI DISTRICT AT ANAKAPALLI. 4. THE TAHSILDAR, SABBAVARAM MANDAL ANAKAPALLI DISTRICT ...RESPONDENT(S): + 2 Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. R SUDHA RANI Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. GP FOR REVENUE The Court made the following: 3 THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE D.RAMESH WRIT PETITION No.31812 of 2025 ORDER: The present writ petition is filed seeking the following relief: “….to issue Writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the 4th Respondent with our peaceful possession and enjoyment of shop by name Sri Durgamamba Pan Shop and Tiffins established under AP.Shops and Establishments Act, 1988 covered by Ac.0.05 Cents in Sy.No.99-1 of Anakapalli Village fields, Sabbavaram Mandal of Anakapalli District threatening to remove the said shop without issuing a prior notice, thus the present writ petition is filed to redress my grievance, by declaring the interference of 4th Respondent illegal, absurd and violation of Articles 14, 19 and 300-A of Constitution of India and consequently direct the 4th Respondent not to remove the said shop covered by Ac.0.05 Cents, in Sy.No.99-1 of Anakapalli Village fields, Sabbavaram Mandal of Anakapalli District….” 2. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue appearing for the respondents. 4 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner has placed reliance on the patta granted in favour of the petitioner in the year 2001. Accordingly, he is in possession of the residential property and the petitioner is a senior citizen, aged 75 years. Now, the respondents are trying to interfere and dispossess the petitioner from the subject property. Hence, the present writ petition. 4. Learned Assistant Government Pleader, on instructions, has submitted that the total extent of the land in Survey No.99-1 is Ac.1.35 cents and the same was assigned to K.Bangaramma for agricultural purpose and the patta relied by the petitioner is a fake and bogus. 5. Considering the submissions, even if the patta is bogus, the petitioner is residing in that property, the respondent authorities are entitled to initiate appropriate action as per the provisions of the Andhra Pradesh Assigned Lands (Prohibition of Transfers) Act, 1977 and without doing so, the respondents are not entitled to dispossess the petitioner from the subject property. 6. Accordingly, the Writ Petition is disposed of directing the respondents not to dispossess the petitioner from the subject 5 property without following due process of law. There shall be no order as to costs. As a sequel, miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shall stand closed. _______________________ JUSTICE D.RAMESH Date: 29.12.2025 Ivd 6 THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE D.RAMESH WRIT PETITION No.31812 of 2025 Dated: 29.12.2025 Ivd