APHC010054252020 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3233] MONDAY,THE ELEVENTH DAY OF AUGUST TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE B KRISHNA MOHAN WRIT PETITION NO: 3263/2020 Between: 1. GANIVADA APPARAO, S/O.LATE PEDDODU, AGED ABOUT 70 YRS, R/O.VEERABADRAPURAM VILLAGE, KOTHAVALASA, VIZIANAGARAM DISTRICT. 2. GANIVADA RAMU NAIDU, , S/O.LATE PEDDODU, AGED ABOUT 75 YRS, R/O.VEERABADRAPURAM VILLAGE, KOTHAVALASA, VIZIANAGARAM DISTRICT. 3. GANIVADA SOMA BABU, S/O.LATE PEDDODU, AGED ABOUT 65 YRS, R/O.VEERABADRAPURAM VILLAGE, KOTHAVALASA, VIZIANAGARAM DISTRICT. 4. GANIVADA SEETHA,, W/O. RAMBABU AGED ABOUT 65 YRS, R/O.VEERABADRAPURAM VILLAGE, KOTHAVALASA, VIZIANAGARAM DISTRICT. 5. GANIVADA ARJUNA, S/O.LATE TATA AGED ABOUT 69 YRS, R/O.VEERABADRAPURAM VILLAGE, KOTHAVALASA, VIZIANAGARAM DISTRICT. 6. GANIVADA ONUMULU, S/O.LATETATA AGED ABOUT 69 YRS, R/O.VEERABADRAPURAM VILLAGE, KOTHAVALASA, VIZIANAGARAM DISTRICT. 7. GANIVADA PENTAIAH, S/O. LATE TATA AGED ABOUT 64 YRS, R/O.VEERABADRAPURAM VILLAGE, KOTHAVALASA, VIZIANAGARAM DISTRICT. 8. MULAGAPAKA RAMA SURI,, S/O.LATE RAMULU, AGED ABOUT 64 2 HBKM,J W.P.No.3263 of 2020 YRS, R/O.MULAGAVAKAVANIPALEM VILLAGE, KOTHAVALASA, VIZIANAGARAM DISTRICT. 9. MULAGAPAKA THRINADHA RAO,, S/O.CHINA RAMU AGED ABOUT 50 YRS, R/O.MULAGAVAKAVANIPALEM VILLAGE, KOTHAVALASA, VIZIANAGARAM DISTRICT. 10. MULAGAPAKA GOPI,, S/O.LATE SURI BABU, AGED ABOUT 34 YRS, R/O.MULAGAVAKAVANIPALEM VILLAGE, KOTHAVALASA, VIZIANAGARAM DISTRICT. 11. MULAGAPAKA DEVUDU,, S/O. LATE RAMULU AGED 64 YRS, PLO.MULAGAVAKAVANIPALEM VILLAGE, KOTHAVALASA, VIZIANAGARAM DISTRICT. 12. MULAGAPAKA SATYAVATHI, D/O.S.KANNAIAH, AGED ABOUT 55 YRS, R/O.MULAGAVAKAVANIPALEM VILLAGE, KOTHAVALASA, VIZIANAGARAM DISTRICT. 13. NLULAGAPAKA RAMU NAIDU,, S/O.LATE RAMULU, AGED 70 YRS, R/O.MULAGAVAKAVANIPALEM VILLAGE, KOTHAVALASA, VIZIANAGARAM DISTRICT. 14. GANIVADA SANYASI RAO, , S/O.LATE G.ONUVULU, AGED 55 YRS, R/O.MULAGAVAKAVANIPALEM VILLAGE, KOTHAVALASA, VIZIANAGARAM DISTRICT. 15. GANIVADA PYDI RAJU, S/O.LATE RAMULU, AGED 56 YRS, R/O.MULAGAVAKAVANIPALEM VILLAGE, KOTHAVALASA, VIZIANAGARAM DISTRICT. 16. KOTANA APPA RAO,, S/O.LATE SIMHADRI, AGED 62 YRS, R/O. MULAGAVAKAVANIPALEM VILLAGE, KOTHAVALASA, VIZIANAGARAM DISTRICT. 17. MULAGAPAKA DEVUDAMMA, W/O. LATE ONUVULU AGED 55 YRS, R/O.MULAGAVAKAVANIPALEM VILLAGE, KOTHAVALASA, VIZIANAGARAM DISTRICT. 18. THEDU RAMANA, S/O.LATE GANGAIAH, AGED 50 YRS, R/O.MULAGAVAKAVANIPALEM VILLAGE, KOTHAVALASA, VIZIANAGARAM DISTRICT. 3 HBKM,J W.P.No.3263 of 2020 19. APPIKONDA RAMANA, , S/O.PEDA MUTYALU AGED 40 YRS, R/O.MULAGAVAKAVANIPALEM VILLAGE, KOTHAVALASA, VIZIANAGARAM DISTRICT. 20. CH.D.V.NAGENDRA BABU,, S/O.LATE PASALA NAIDU, AGED 35 YRS, R/O.MULAGAVAKAVANIPALEM VILLAGE, KOTHAVALASA, VIZIANAGARAM DISTRICT. 21. KALLA APPA RAO,, S/O.KALLA APPALA NAIDU, AGED 49 YRS, R/O.MULAGAVAKAVANIPALEM VILLAGE, KOTHAVALASA, VIZIANAGARAM DISTRICT. 22. CHINTADA RAMA SATYAM, , S/O. CHINNODU, AGED 54 YRS R/O.MULAGAVAKAVANIPALEM VILLAGE, KOTHAVALASA, VIZIANAGARAM DISTRICT. 23. GANIVADA AMMAJI,, W/O.NAGA RAJU, AGED 39 YRS, R/O.MULAGAVAKAVANIPALEM VILLAGE, KOTHAVALASA, VIZIANAGARAM DISTRICT. 24. THEDU NARAYANA,, S/O. LATE ATCHAIAH AGED 80 YRS, R/O.MULAGAVAKAVANIPALEM VILLAGE, KOTHAVALASA, VIZIANAGARAM DISTRICT. 25. CHIPPADA APPALA NAIDU,, S/O. LATE SOMULU, AGED 76 YRS, R/O.MULAGAVAKAVANIPALEM VILLAGE, KOTHAVALASA, VIZIANAGARAM DISTRICT. 26. CHINTADA PASALA NAIDU,, S/O.CHINNODU, AGED 67 YRS, R/O.MULAGAVAKAVANIPALEM VILLAGE, KOTHAVALASA, VIZIANAGARAM DISTRICT. 27. MULAGAPAKA RAMA DASU, , S/O.LATE RAMULU, AGED 66 YRS, R/O.MULAGAVAKAVANIPALEM KOTHAVALASA, VIZIANAGARAM DISTRICT. 28. GANIVADA CHINA PYDI RAJU,, S/O. CHINNA APPALA NAIDU AGED 46 YRS, R/O.MULAGAVAKAVANIPALEM VILLAGE, KOTHAVALASA, VIZIANAGARAM DISTRICT. 29. POTNURI ERUKULAMMA,, W/O.LATE APPALA NAIDU, AGED 72 YRS, R/O.MULAGAVAKAVANIPALEM VILLAGE, KOTHAVALASA, VIZIANAGARAM DISTRICT. 4 HBKM,J W.P.No.3263 of 2020 30. MUNAGAPAKA LAKSHMI RAMANAMMA, W/O.SANYASI AGED ABOUT 54 YRS, R/O.MULAGAVAKAVANIPALEM VILLAGE, KOTHAVALASA, VIZIANAGARAM DISTRICT. ...PETITIONER(S) AND 1. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY REVENUE DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT, VELAGAPUDI, AMRAVATI, GUNTUR DISTRICT. 2. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, VIZIANAGARAM DISTRICT 3. THE TAHSILDAR, , KOTHAVALASA MANDAL, VIZIANAGARAM DISTRICT ...RESPONDENT(S): Counsel for the Petitioner(S): 1. A S C BOSE Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. GP FOR REVENUE (AP) 5 HBKM,J W.P.No.3263 of 2020 The Court made the following Order:- Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned Assistant Government Pleader for the respondents. 2. This writ petition was filed questioning the action of the 3rd respondent in trying to dispossess the petitioners from their respective lands in an extent of Ac.0.60, Ac.1.00, Ac.0.60, Ac.0.40, Ac.0.50, Ac.0.50, Ac.0.70, Ac.0.40, Ac.0.20, Ac.0.20, Ac.0.20, Ac.0.20, Ac.0.15, Ac.0.35, Ac.0.05, Ac.0.40, Ac. 0.50, Ac.0.20, Ac.1.00, Ac.0.20, Ac.0.15, Ac.0.15, Ac.0.10, Ac.1.00, Ac.0.25, Ac.0.15, Ac.0.15, Ac.0.15, Ac.0.60, and Ac.0.20 cents in Sy.No.365/2, Veerabadrapuram Village, Kothavalasa Mandal Vizianagararn District, without issuing any notice and without following the due procedure contemplated under law. 3. The learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the father of the petitioner Nos.1 to 4 namely Peddodu, the father of the petitioner Nos.5 to 7 namely Tata purchased an extent of 1.00 cents in Sy.No.365/2, Veerabadrapuram Village, Kothavalasa Mandal, Vizianagaram District vide registered sale deed dated 20.10.1966 from their vendor namely Joga Rao and others who are Inamdars of an extent of Ac.1.00 cents. They along with Munagapaka Ammanna who is also Inamdars of land in an extent of Ac.12.81 cents in Sy.No.365/2, Veerabadrapuram Village, Kothavalasa Mandal, Vizianagaram District. After the death of Peddodu and Tata their legal heirs i.e., the petitioner Nos.1 to 4 and 5 to 7 are in possession of the subject land 6 HBKM,J W.P.No.3263 of 2020 along with other lands, which were given to them by the Inamdars for their livelihood. Likewise, the Inamdars also given small extents of lands to the petitioner Nos.8 to 30 and their ancestors for their livelihood and thus the petitioners are in possession of their respective extents for the last so many years. While so, suddenly the 3rd respondent is trying to interfere with their possession in the first week of January 2020, hence they issued a legal notice on 12.01.2020 to the respondent Nos.2 and 3, enclosing the sale deed and the other relevant revenue records. But surprisingly, the officials of the 3rd respondent came to the land on 04.02.2020 and started measuring the land stating that they are going to make the land into house plots to allot the same to the weaker sections. Hence, this writ petition. 4. On the other hand, the learned Assistant Government Pleader relying upon the written instructions of the 3rd respondent dated 10.02.2020 submits that as per the FCO fair adangal, the land in Sy.No.365/1 and 2 was sub divided into 365/1 measuring an extent of Ac.1.05 cents as Rasta Poramboke and 365/2 measuring an extent of Ac.4.83 cents as AWD land. The Sy.No.365/3 measuring an extent of Ac.0.79 cents was recorded as assigned land to Ganivada Appanna and Sy.No.365/4 measuring an extent of Ac.6.14 cents was recorded as D-form patta to Ganivada Appanna and others. 5. The Government land in Sy.No.365/2 measuring an extent of Ac.4.83 cents is an un-assigned land, which is proposed for house sites. The Tahsildar, Kothavalasa is not disturbing the assignees. 7 HBKM,J W.P.No.3263 of 2020 6. In view of the above said facts and circumstances, upon consideration of the rival submissions made and in view of the written instructions of the 3rd respondent dated 10.02.2020 addressed to the learned Government Pleader, High Court of Andhra Pradesh at Amaravati, this Court directs the respondent Nos.2 and 3 to deal with the subject land strictly in accordance with law, if so required for any public purpose and if the petitioners are otherwise in possession of the same, they shall be dealt with strictly in accordance with law by giving due opportunity of hearing and they shall not be dispossessed from the subject land except by following the due process of law. 7. Accordingly, this Writ Petition is disposed of. Interim order, if any, deemed to have been vacated. There shall be no order as to costs. As a sequel, Interlocutory Applications pending, if any, shall stand closed. __________________________ JUSTICE B. KRISHNA MOHAN 11.08.2025 PGT