APHC010072802019 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3368] MONDAY, THE EIGHTH DAY OF SEPTEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE B V L N CHAKRAVARTHI WRIT PETITION NO: 3257/2019 Between: 1. CHALLAGUNDLA HARIBABU,, S/O. SUBBA RAO, AGED 49 YEARS, OCC CULTIVATION, R/O. BESIDE RAMA TALKIES, ADDANKI TOWN, PRAKASAM DISTRICT ...PETITIONER AND 1. THE STATE OF AP, REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, REVENUE DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT, VELAGAPUDI, AMARAVATHI, GUNTUR DISTRICT. 2. DISTRICT COLLECTOR, PRAKASAM DISTRICT AT ONGOLE. 3. TAHSILDAR, , MUNDLAMURU MANDAL, PRAKASAM DISTRICT. 4. MANDAL SURVEYOR, , 0/O. TAHSILDAR, MUNDLAMURU MANDAL, PRAKASAM DISTRICT. 5. STATION HOUSE OFFICER, MUNDLAMURU POLICE STATION, PRAKASAM DISTRICT. 6. GUDIMEDA RAJESWARI, W/O. RAMA RAO, AGED 60 YEARS, R/O. NAIDUPALEM VILLAGE, MUNDLAMURU MANDAL, PRAKASAM DISTRICT. ...RESPONDENT(S): 2 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, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of WRIT OF MANDAMUS declaring the action of respondents 3 to 5 at the instance of 6th respondent in insisting the petitioner to vacate from his agricultural landed properties admeasuring Ac. 0.32 cents, Ac. 0.95 cents, Ac. 0.58 cents, Ac. 0.40 cents, Ac. 0.26 cents, Ac. 0.36 cents, Ac. 0.16 cents, Ac. 0.44 cents and Ac. 0.31 cents respectively covered by Survey Numbers 169/4, 169/5, 169/12, 169/8, 169/1, 172/1, 170/12, 162/7 and 17015 of Pedaravipadu Village of Mundlamuru Mandal in Prakasam District under the guise of survey and fixation of boundaries, as illegal, irregular, irrational and violative of Articles 14, 21 and 300-A of Constitution of India and consequently direct the respondents not to interfere in any manner with the petitioner's possession over his said lands and pass such IA NO: 1 OF 2019 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 direct the respondents 2 to 5 at the instance of 6th respondent, not to interfere in any manner with the petitioner's possession over his agricultural landed properties admeasuring Ac. 0.32 cents, Ac. 0.95 cents, Ac. 0.58 cents, Ac. 0.40 cents, Ac. 0,26 cents, Ac. 0.36 cents, Ac. 0.16 cents, Ac. 0.44 cents and Ac. 0.31 cents respectively covered by Survey Numbers 169/4, 169/5, 169/12, 169/8, 169/1, 172/1, 170/12, 162/7 and 170/5 of Pedaravipadu Village of Mundlamuru Mandal in Prakasam District, pending disposal of the main Writ Petition Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. NIMMAGADDA REVATHI Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. GP FOR HOME (AP) 2. RAVI KUMAR C 3. GP FOR REVENUE (AP) 3 THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE B.V.L.N. CHAKRAVARTHI WRIT PETITION NO: 3257 of 2019 The Court made the following Order: Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned counsel for the unofficial respondent No.6 and learned Additional Government Pleader representing the State. 2. Learned counsel for the unofficial respondent No.6 would submit that the petitioner filed a suit in OS No.34 of 2007 on the file of the learned Senior Civil Judge, Darsi against some third parties, seeking permanent injunction and subsequently, the said suit was dismissed by the trial Court. Later, respondent No.6 file a suit in OS No.10 of 2014 against the petitioner herein and another which was dismissed for default. Later, the parties approached the Tahsildar for survey of land to fix boundaries. On the representation made by respondent No.6, while the Tahsildar tried to survey the land to fix boundaries, the petitioner interfered with the survey. Therefore, the Tahsildar requested the Police to assist him for conducting survey and fix boundaries. At that juncture the present Writ Petition is filed, alleging that the police are interfering with the possession of the petitioner. 4 3. It appears that the disputed property is subject matter of civil suit, as stated above. 4. Learned Additional Government Pleader on written instructions would submit that the Police will not interfere in such civil dispute, without following due process of law. 5. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, this Court is of the considered opinion that this Court cannot conduct a roving enquiry into the civil disputes under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, as laid down by the Hon’ble Apex Court P.Muralidharan & Ors Vs. Swami Dharmananda Theertha Padar & Ors1. If the Petitioner is so aggrieved by the acts of the unofficial respondent No.7 or the Tahsildar, he is at liberty to approach proper forum, for necessary redressal, in accordance with law. 6. In that view of the matter, nothing remains for further adjudication in the present Writ Petition. 7. Accordingly, this Writ Petition is closed at the state of admission itself. However, the Petitioner is at liberty to approach 1 (2006) 4 SCC 501 5 proper forum for necessary redressal, in accordance with law. There shall be no order as to costs. Interlocutory applications, if any, pending shall stand closed. ______________________________ JUSTICE B.V.L.N. CHAKRAVARTHI Dated: 08.09.2025 PSA 6 THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE B.V.L.N. CHAKRAVARTHI WRIT PETITION NO: 3257 of 2019 Date: 08.09.2025 PSA