APHC010089082025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3329] FRIDAY ,THE SEVENTH DAY OF MARCH TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE VENKATESWARLU NIMMAGADDA WRIT PETITION NO: 4812/2025 Between: A Ratna Reddy ...PETITIONER AND The State Of Andhra Pradesh and Others ...RESPONDENT(S) Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. P JAGADISH CHANDRA PRASAD Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. GP FOR REVENUE The Court made the following: O R D E R: This writ petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking the following relief: “to issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ or direction declaring the action of Respondent No.5 in interfering with the petitioner’s possession and enjoyment of the property situated in S.No.284/17A of an extent of Ac.0-56 cents at Nalapalli Village, SR Puram Mandal, Chittoor District, as illegal, arbitrary, unconstitutional and being violative of Articles 14, 21 and 300A of the Constitution of India and in violation of principles of natural justice and consequently direct the Respondent No 5 to not to interfere into the petitioners peaceful possession and enjoyment of the property situated in S No 284/17A of an extent of Ac.0-56 cents at Nalapalli Village SR Puram Mandal Chittoor District Andhra Pradesh.” During hearing, learned counsel for the petitioner, without touching the merits of the case, requested this Court to issue a direction to the respondents not to dispossess the petitioner from his land without following due process of law. Learned Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue submits that, if the petitioner is in possession of the subject property, the respondents would follow due process of law and requested to pass appropriate orders. When the petitioner is in settled possession and enjoyment of the property, he cannot be dispossessed, without following due process of law in view of the law declared by the Apex Court in “Rame Gowda (dead) by L.Rs. v. M.Varadappa Naidu (Dead) by L.Rs.1”. Therefore, if the petitioner is in possession of the subject property, the respondents are directed not to dispossess the petitioner from the subject property, except by due process of law. With the above direction, the writ petition is disposed of at the stage of admission with the consent of both the counsel. No costs. The miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shall also stand closed. _____________________________________ JUSTICE VENKATESWARLU NIMMAGADDA Date: 07.03.2025 SP 1 2004 (1) SCC 769 THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE VENKATESWARLU NIMMAGADDA WRIT PETITION NO: 4812/2024 Date:07.03.2025 W sp