APHC010103512025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3329] THURSDAY ,THE SIXTH DAY OF MARCH TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE VENKATESWARLU NIMMAGADDA WRIT PETITION NO: 5465/2025 Between: C Purushothama Reddy, and Others ...PETITIONER(S) AND The State Of Andhra Pradesh and Others ...RESPONDENT(S) Counsel for the Petitioner(S): 1. K NARSI REDDY Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. GP FOR REVENUE The Court made the following: THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE VENKATESWARLU NIMMAGADDA WRIT PETITION NO:5465/2025 ORDER: The present writ petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking following relief: “to issue order or direction more particularly in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring (a) the action of the respondents No.4 in evicting or disposes the petitioners from land an extent of Ac.1.08 cents in Sy.No.281-4 situated at Bhoginepalli, H/o.Palacherla Village, Rapthadu Mandal, Anantapur District (b) the 4th respondent in allotting the above said land for Burial ground without following the due process of law and procedure vide Rc.No.A/24/2025 dated 10.01.2025 as illegal, arbitrary, unjust and volative of principles of Natural Justice and violation of Articles 14, 21 and 300-A of the Constitution of India and set aside the same and (c) consequently direct the respondents not to disposes or interfere with in the above subject land and pass such other order or orders….” 2. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned Government Pleader for Revenue for the respondents. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioners herein are in joint possession and enjoyment of the land admeasuring to an extent of Ac.1.08 cents in Sy.No.281-4 situated at Bhoginepalli, H/o Palacherla Village, Rapthadu Mandal, Anantapur District. The petitioners have been in possession and cultivating the said land since thirty years. To that effect, the petitioners were issued a certificate dated 06.08.2008, certifying the petitioners are in joint possession and enjoyment of the subject land for the purpose of cultivating agricultural crops. 4. While things stood thus, respondent No.4 herein without observing principles of natural justice and without providing fair and reasonable opportunity of hearing to the petitioners straight away issued impugned proceedings dated 10.01.2025 converting the nature of the land and alienating the same in favour of the villagers as Burial ground, pursuant to the representation said to have been submitted by the villagers requesting for providing a burial ground. Learned counsel for the petitioners also submits that the impugned proceedings dated 10.01.2025 issued by respondent No.4 is without jurisdiction and contrary to the principles of natural justice. Therefore, the impugned proceedings dated 10.01.2025 is liable to be set aside. 5. On the other hand, learned Government Pleader for revenue appearing for the respondents furnished written instructions dated 01.03.2025 issued by respondent No.4. The relevant portion of the said instructions is extracted hereunder: “In response to the aforesaid representation, the Mandal Revenue Inspector, Rapthadu has submitted a report stating that the Government land to an extent of Ac.1.08 cents in Sy.No.281-4 of Palacherla Village of Rapthadu Mandal has been identified for allotment for Burial Ground purpose to allow the SC people of Bhoginepalli H/o Palacherla Village of Rapthadu Mandal to utilize as Burial Ground. Basing on the report and recommendations of the Mandal Revenue Inspector, Rapthadu, orders issued by the TAhsildar, Rapthadu vide Rc.No.A/24/2025, dated 10.01.2025 allotting the land to an extent of Ac.1.08 cents in Sy.No.281-4 situated in Bhoginepalli H/o Palacherla Village of Rapthadu Mandal for Burial Ground purpose to allow the SC people to utilize as Burial Ground. It is submitted that there is no record available in the office for possession certificate issued in favour of the petitioners to an extent of Ac. 1.08 cents in Sy.No.281-4 of Palacherla Village of Rapthadu Mandal. Further, no one is being in possession and enjoyment of the land. The allegations of the petitioners are far from truth and baseless. 6. Learned Government Pleader for the respondents further submits that the action of respondent No.4 cannot be find fault with, since to achieve public interest only the subject land was allotted as Burial ground. He further submits that the subject certificate dated 06.08.2008 issued by respondent No.4 is not genuine and the petitioners are not in possession of the subject property and they are claiming rights over the Government land. 7. Having regard to the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioners and learned Government Pleader for Revenue for the respondents and on perusal of the material placed on record, it is observed that the impugned proceedings dated 10.01.2025 issued by respondent No.4 certainly is in violation of principles of natural justice. It is a settled law that respondent No.4 did not have any jurisdiction to alienate the Government land on his own in favour of any authority or person or even to achieve any public interest. Therefore, the action of respondent No.4 is certainly out of jurisdiction and liable to be set aside. It is further observed that as contended by the learned counsel for the petitioners, the subject proceedings are not preceded by any prior notice as required while exercising action on part of respondent No.4. Furthermore, as contended by the learned Government Pleader, the certificate issued by the then Tahsildar, Rapthadu Mandal dated 06.08.2008, whether it is genuine or not to be enquired into after following the due procedure as contemplated under the law. 8. For the reasons mentioned above, the impugned proceedings dated 10.01.2025 issued by respondent No.4 is liable to be set aside. 9. Accordingly, the impugned proceedings dated 10.01.2025 issued by respondent No.4 is hereby set aside. However, the respondents are at liberty to proceed further in accordance with law. In the meanwhile, without following due procedure, the petitioners possession in respect of the subject property cannot be interfered. 10. With the above observations, the writ petition is disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs. Consequently, Miscellaneous Petitions, if any, pending in the writ petition shall stand closed. ________________________________ VENKATESWARLU NIMMAGADDA, J 06.03.2025 BSP 03 THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE VENKATESWARLU NIMMAGADDA WRIT PETITION No.5465 of 2025 06.03.2025 BSP