APHC010176142026 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3329] WEDNESDAY,THE FIFTEENTH DAY OF APRIL TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE VENKATESWARLU NIMMAGADDA WRIT PETITION NO: 9839/2026 Between: 1. SUNKARA VISALAKSHI,, D/O. SUNKARA KESAVARAO, AGED ABOUT 56 YEARS, R/O H. NO.4-95/25, GOPALAKRISHNA NAGAR, PENDURTHI MANDAL, VISAKHAPATNAM - 530051. 2. SUNKARA SOMA MALINI,, D/O. SUNKARA KESAVARAO, AGED ABOUT 51 YEARS, R/O H. NO.4-95/25, GOPALAKRISHNA NAGAR, PENDURTHI MANDAL, VISAKHAPATNAM- 530051. 3. SUNKARA SHRIKANTH RATNA KUMAR,, S/O. SUNKARA KESAVARAO, AGED ABOUT 42 YEARS, R/O H. NO.4-95/25, GOPALAKRISHNA NAGAR, PENDURTHI MANDAL, VISAKHAPATNAM - 530051. ...PETITIONER(S) AND 1. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, REVENUE (ENDOWMENTS) DEPARTMENT SECRETARIAT BUILDINGS, VELAGAPUDI, AMARAVATHI.522237 2. SRI VARAHA LAKSHMI NARASIMHA SWAMY DEVASTHANAM, REP. BY ITS EXECUTIVE OFFICER SIMHACHALAM, VISAKHAPATNAM DISTRICT.522241 3. THE TAHSILDAR, (MANDAL REVENUE OFFICER), GOPALAPATNAM, VISAKHAPATNAM DISTRICT. 530027 ...RESPONDENT(S): 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 topleased to issue a Writ, order or direction, more particularly a Writ of Mandamus, declaring the action of the Respondents in interfering with the 2 Petitioner's peaceful possession and enjoyment of the property located at D. No. 7-234, Vepagunta Village, Visakhapatnam, without initiating any proceedings as per due process of law, as illegal, arbitrary, and violative of Articles 14 and 21 of Constitution of India and Consequently, direct the Respondents not to interfere with the Petitioner's peaceful possession unless by following the due process of law IA NO: 1 OF 2026 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 pleased to direct the respondents not to interfere with my peaceful possession and enjoyment of the property unless by following due process of law Counsel for the Petitioner(S): 1. SANAPATI SWAROOP RAJ Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. GP FOR REVENUE 2. GP FOR ENDOWMENTS The Court made the following: 3 THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE VENKATESWARLU NIMMAGADDA WRIT PETITION NO: 9839/2026 ORDER: This writ petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of the India seeking the following reliefs:- <to issue a writ, order or direction particularly one in the nature of a writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the Respondents in interfering with the Petitioners’ peaceful possession and enjoyment of the property located at D.No.7-234, Vepagunta Village, Visakhapatnam, without initiating any proceedings as per due process of law, as illegal, arbitrary, and violative of Articles 14 and 21 of Constitution of India and consequently, direct the Respondents not to interfere with the Petitioners’ peaceful possession unless by following the due process of lawand to pass such other order or orders.= 2. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned Government Pleader and the learned Standing Counsel for the respondents. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the subject property i.e., RCC slab house bearing D.No.7-234 in an extent of 235 Sq. yards is situated at Vepagunta Village, Visakhapatnam. Originally, the grandmother of the petitioners purchased the subject property through a registered sale deed dated 03.06.1974. Thereafter, the petitioners’ grandmother bequeathed the subject property in favour of the mother of the petitioners. Subsequently, the mother of the petitioners executed a Will dated 22.05.2017 in favour of the petitioners. A portion of the land 4 admeasuring to an extent of 24.27 sq. meters was handed over to the Corporation for road widening, the Greater Visakhapatnam Municipal Corporation awarded a transferable development right to the petitioners’ mother. The said house is in a dilapidated condition and requires urgent repairs to ensure its structural integrity. While things stood thus, when the petitioners are trying to commence necessary repair works, the 2nd respondent began interfering with the petitioners’ activities and calming that the land belongs to them. The respondents cannot interfere with the private property of the petitioners, without following due process of law. Hence, the writ petition. 4. On the other hand, learned Government Pleader and the learned Standing Counsel submits that if the respondents intend to interfere with the petitioners’ subject property, they will follow due process of law. 5. Considering the submissions made by the learned counsel for all the parties and on perusal of the material placed on record, this Court is of the considered opinion that the present Writ Petition can be disposed of directing the respondents not to interfere with the peaceful possession and enjoyment of the petitioners’ subject property, without following due process of law. 5 6. With the above direction, the Writ Petition is disposed of. No costs. As a sequel miscellaneous application, pending, if any, shall also stand closed. ________________________________ VENKATESWARLU NIMMAGADDA, J 15.04.2026 TTPPSS 6 147 HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE VENKATESWARLU NIMMAGADDA WRIT PETITION NO: 9839/2026 15.04.2026 TTPPSS