1 APHC010715862022 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3457] MONDAY, THE 28th DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2026 PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE HARINATH.N WRIT PETITION NO: 42144/2022 Between: 1. KONDAGORRI ANURADHA, W/O SUNDARA RAO, AGED 56 YEARS, SEETHAMPETA VILLAGE AND MANDAL, SRIKAKULAM DISTRICT. 2. NIMMAKA LAXMI, W/O VARAPRASAD, AGED 49 YEARS, SEETHAMPETA VILLAGE AND MANDAL, SRIKAKULAM DISTRICT. ...PETITIONER(S) AND 1. THE STATE OF AP, REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, TRIBAL DEPARTMENT, VELAGAPUDI, AMARAVATHI, GUNTUR DISTRICT. 2. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, SRIKAKULAM DISTRICT, SRIKAKULAM. 3. THE SPL DEPUTY COLLECTOR, TRIBAL WELFARE, ELWINPET , VIJAYANAGARAM DISTRICT, VIJAYANAGARAM. 4. THE REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER, PALAKONDA, SRIKAKULAM DISTRICT. 5. THE PROJECT OFFICER, INTEGRATED TRIBAL DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY, SEETHAMPET VILLAGE AND MANDAL, SRIKAKULARN DISTRICT. 6. THE DIVISIONAL MANAGER, GIRIJAN CO-OPERATIVE CORPORATION LIMITED (GCC) SITHAMPETA SRIKAKULAM DISTRICT 7. THE TAHSILDAR, SEETHAMPET VILLAGE AND MANDAL, 2 SRIKAKULAM DISTRICT. ...RESPONDENTS ...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 or order under Article 226 of the constitution of India, particularly one in the nature of writ of MANDAMUS declaring the action of the respondents interfering with the petitioners' possession and enjoyment of their respective houses situated opposite to HP Petrol Bunk, near main road Seethampeta Village AND Mandal, Srikakulam District. including installing a Name Board near their houses containing This site is in the court disputes and construction on the site is a legal offence as illegal,' arbitrary and void and violative of the Articles 14, 21, and 300-A of the Constitution of India besides violation of the principles of Natural Justice and consequently direct the respondents not to interfere with petitioners possession and enjoyment of their respective houses and to pass IA NO: 1 OF 2022 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 pass an order directing the respondents not to demolish the houses of the petitioners situated opposite to HP Petrol Bunk, near main road Seethampeta Village 85 Mandal, Srikakulam District. vide Rekha No. 235/03A with the title House Site Granting Orders in the Villages (As per Standing Order No. 21 para 7 clause (11)) dated 25-08-2003 issued by the Tahasildar, Seethampeta, the 7th respondent pending the writ petition as otherwise the petitioners would suffer great and irreparable loss and hardship IA NO: 1 OF 2023 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 vacate the interim order dt:29.12.2022 in W.P.No.42144/2022 IA.No.1/2022 dismiss the above writ petition and pass Counsel for the Petitioner(S): 1. Y KOTESWARA RAO Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. GP FOR REVENUE 3 2. GP FOR SOCIAL WELFARE 4 The Court made the following order: The petitioners are aggrieved by the action of respondent No. 6 in interfering with the petitioners’ possession and enjoyment of their respective houses and displaying the banners cautioning against construction over the subject property. 2. It is the specific case of the petitioners that the petitioners were granted house site pattas in the year 2003 and that they have been residing peacefully over the said plots. The learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the respondent authorities, without issuing notices, have erected banners cautioning legal action against any construction over the subject property. It is submitted that the respondents could not have interfered with the possession and enjoyment of the petitioners after having issued house site pattas in the year 2003. 3. The learned Assistant Government Pleader appearing for the respondents submits that a detailed counter is filed and it is stated in the counter that the house site pattas submitted by the petitioners along with the writ petition are not found in their records. It is further stated that the subject property was handed over to Girijana Corporation in the year 1988 and the claim of the petitioners that house site pattas were issued in the year 2003 does not withstand the scrutiny of revenue records. It is admitted that the petitioners and others are encroachers and that the petitioners intended to construct a new building over the subject site. Accordingly, banners were set 5 up by respondent No. 6, cautioning the encroachers of legal action in the event they undertake any construction over the subject property. 4. It is also submitted that W.P No. 972 of 2019 is pending consideration before this Court and the writ petition was filed by other encroachers over the subject property. It is submitted that all the encroachers are unauthorised occupants and that the petitioners cannot claim title over the subject property. 5. It is submitted that pattas could not be issued in favour of the petitioners in the year 2003 for the said land which was already handed over to the Girijana Corporation in the year 1988. 6. The petitioners claim to be in possession of the subject property from the year 2003 onwards and Ac.0.02 cents of land is the subject of the disputed patta certificate. The petitioners have constructed tin shed houses and are said to be residing over the same for the two decades. 7. The respondents shall have to determine the genuineness of the patta certificates and also consider the possession of the petitioners over the said property by constructing tin shed houses, the petitioners possession was not challenged by respondent No.6 for all these years. 8. Any action against the petitioners for relocating them will have to be after offering alternative house site pattas. However, the said exercise shall be conducted by the respondents after verifying the possession and enjoyment of the petitioners over the subject property for the last two decades 6 and also considering the documents as submitted by the petitioners to establish their possession and enjoyment. The respondents shall have to issue appropriate notices seeking eviction from the subject property and the respondents shall have to consider the reply of the petitioners and the documents as submitted by the petitioners. 9. With the above observations, the Writ Petition is disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs. As a sequel, pending miscellaneous petitions, if any, shall stand closed. ____________________ JUSTICE HARINATH.N 28.09.2026 RJS 7 HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE HARINATH.N W.P.No:42144 of 2022 Dt: 28.09.2026 RJS 8