Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Andhra Pradesh · body

2025 DAILYLAW 7114 (AP)

Yarru Sumalatha v. State of Andhra Pradesh,

WP/4163/2020 · 2025-08-10

B Krishna Mohan

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

APHC010069832020 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: 4163/2020 Between: 1. YARRU SUMALATHA, W/O VENKATESWARLU, AGED 39 YEARS, OCC- HOUSEWIFE, RIO HNO- 26-63, KABELA CENTER, NEAR NAGASAIBABA TEMPLE, GOLLAPUDI, VIJAYAWADA. 2. THOTA VIDYA SEERLA VIDYA, W/O GOPINADH, AGED 38 YEARS, OCC- HOUSEWIFE, RIO HNO-2-131, NANDIVELUGU, GUNTUR, GUNTUR DISTRICT. 3. KOTA SIRISHA LAKSHMI, W/O KOTA RAMESH BABU, AGED 40 YEARS, OCC- HOUSEWIFE, RIA HNO- 31-2-6/A, VEERAIAH STREET, PLOT NO- 102, MARUTHI NAGAR, VIJAYAWADA. 4. MEDA VENKATA RAMA MURALI KRISHNA, S/O POLAIAH, AGED 45 YEARS, OCC- BUSINESS, RIO HNO- 23-22-9A, HANUMAN STREET, SATYANARAYANAPURAM, VIJAYAWADA. 5. MEDA UMA MAHESWARI, W/O RAMAKRISHNA, AGED 42 YEARS, OCC- HOUSEWIFE, RIO HANUMAN STREET, SATYANARAYANAPURAM, VIJAYAWADA. ...PETITIONER(S) AND 1. STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY TO GOVT., REVENUE DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT, VELAGAPUDI, GUNTUR. 2. DISTRICT COLLECTOR, KRISHNA DISTRICT AT MACHILIPATNAM. 2 HBKM,J W.P.No.4163 of 2020 3. REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER, VIJAYAWADA DIVISION, KRISHNA DISTRICT. 4. TAHSILDAR, VIJAYAWADA RURAL MANDAL, KRISHNA DISTRICT 5. VILLAGE REVENUE OFFICER, AMBAPURAM REVENUE VILLAGE, VIJAYAWADA RURAL MANDAL, KRISHNA DISTRICT ...RESPONDENT(S): Counsel for the Petitioner(S): 1. M SOLOMON RAJU Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. GP FOR REVENUE (AP) 3 HBKM,J W.P.No.4163 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 respondent Nos.4 and 5 in trying to dispossess the petitioners from their lands in an extent of Ac.0.05 cents each in R.S.No.72/1 of Ambapuram Revenue Village, Vijayawada Rural Mandal, Krishna District without following the due process of law. 3. The learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioners are the owners, enjoyers and possessors of the lands in R.S.No.72/1 of Ambapuram Revenue Village, Vijayawada Rural Mandal, Krishna District. The 1st petitioner and the 2nd petitioner purchased the land in an extent of Ac.0.05 cents or 180 Sq. yards under two different registered sale deeds dated 16.04.2004 from their vendors namely Somichetty Chenchaiah and Alla Jagannadha Lakshmi. The 3rd petitioner is the absolute owner, enjoyer and possessor of the land in an extent of Ac.0.05 cents or 180 Sq. yards under the registered sale deed dated 08.04.2004. The petitioner Nos.4 and 5 are the absolute owners, enjoyers and possessors of the land in an extent of Ac.0.05 cents or 180 Sq. yards in Sy.No.72/1 Ambapuram Revenue Village by purchasing the same under two different sale deeds dated 08.04.2004. While so, on 10.02.2020, the respondent Nos.4 and 5 tried to interfere with the peaceful possession of the petitioners on the ground that the subject land will 4 HBKM,J W.P.No.4163 of 2020 be converted into house sites for the welfare scheme of the state and to allot the same to the beneficiaries. Hence, this writ petition. 4. On the other hand, the learned Assistant Government Pleader appearing for the respondents relying upon the counter of the 4th respondent submits that the subject land is the surplus land and the petitioners are illegally cultivating the subject land without any valid documents. 5. In view of the above said facts and circumstances, the respondent Nos.2 to 5 are directed to deal with the subject lands strictly in accordance with law, if so warranted 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 any dispossession from the subject land shall not be made except by following the due process of law. 6. 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