APHC010037702026 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3331] TUESDAY,THE TWENTY SEVENTH DAY OF JANUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE SUBBA REDDY SATTI WRIT PETITION NO: 2264/2026 Between: 1. V SURENDRA REDDY, S/O LATE PADMANABHA REDDY, AGED ABOUT 60 YEARS. OCCUPATION AGRICULTURE, R/O. DURGAVARAM VILLAGE, MUTTIMBAKA POST.VAKADU MANDAL, TIRUPATI DISTRICT, ANDHRA PRADESH- 524415 ...PETITIONER AND 1. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, PANCHAYAT RAJ AND RURAL DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT BUILDINGS, VELAGAPUDI, AMARAVATI - 522238, ANDHRA PRADESH 2. THE PANCHAYAT RAJ AND RURAL DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT, GOVERNMENT OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP. BY ITS COMMISSIONER, TADEPALLI, AMARAVATI, GUNTUR DISTRICT - 522 501, ANDHRA PRADESH 3. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, TIRUPATI DISTRICT, COLLECTORATE OFFICE, TIRUPATI - 517 501, ANDHRA PRADESH 4. THE DISTRICT PANCHAYAT OFFICER, TIRUPATI DISTRICT, DISTRICT PANCHAYAT OFFICE, TIRUPATI - 517 501, ANDHRA PRADESH. Page 2 of 5 SRS,J W.P.No.2264 of 2026 5. THE MANDAL PARISHAD DEVELOPMENT OFFICER MPDO, VAKADU MANDAL, MANDAL REVENUE OFFICE, VAKADU, TIRUPATI DISTRICT, ANDHRA PRADESH- 524415 6. THE PANCHAYAT SECRETARY, DURGAVARAM GRAM PANCHAYAT, VAKADU MANDAL, TIRUPATI DISTRICT, ANDHRA PRADESH-524415 ...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 an appropriate order or direction more particularly, one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus, declaring the action of Respondent No. 6 in interfering with and attempting to disturb the Petitioner's peaceful possession and enjoyment of the Schedule Property i.e., in Survey No. 2, approximately an extent of Ac.0.05 cents situated at Durgavaram Village, Muttimbaka Post, Vakadu Mandal, Tirupati District, Andhra Pradesh as illegal, arbitrary, unreasonable, without authority of law and violative of the principles of natural justice and Article 300-A of the Constitution of India, and consequently direct Respondent No. 6 and the other Respondents not to interfere with the Petitioner's peaceful possession and enjoyment of the Schedule Property in any manner whatsoever, and to pass 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 stay and restrain Respondent No. 6, his men, agents or anyone acting through him from in any manner interfering with the Petitioner's peaceful possession and enjoyment of the Schedule Property i.e., in Survey No. 2, approximately an extent of Ac.0.05 cents situated at Durgavaram Village, Muttimbaka Post, Vakadu Mandal, Tirupati District, Andhra Pradesh and from dispossessing the Petitioner therefrom, and further direct the Respondents to maintain status quo with respect to the Schedule Property, pending disposal of the above writ petition and to pass p. 3 SRS,J W.P.No.2264 of 2026 Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. PATIL YUGANDHAR REDDY Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. GP FOR PANCHAYAT RAJ RURAL DEV 2. GP FOR REVENUE The Court made the following: ::ORDER :: Heard Sri Patil Yugandhar Reddy, learned counsel for the petitioner; Smt. Naga Chandrika, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Panchayat Raj, for respondents 1, 2 and 4; Sri D. Sanjeeva Rao, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue, for respondent No.3; and Sri S. Hruthik, learned counsel representing Sri Y. Koteshwara Rao, learned standing counsel for respondents 5 and 6. 2. The grievance of the petitioner is that respondent No.6 is interfering with the petitioner’s possession and enjoyment of an extent of Ac.0-05 cents situated at Durgavaram village, Muttimbaka Post, Vakadu Mandal, Tirupati District, Andhra Pradesh, without issuing any notice. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner has been in possession and enjoyment of the subject property. The petitioner and his predecessors in interest have had the subject land since time immemorial. He would submit that as per FMB, Ex.P2, there exists a thatched house in the p. 4 SRS,J W.P.No.2264 of 2026 subject land. However, by afflux of time, the thatched house was collapsed, and the said site is being used to store dung/hay rick. 4. Learned counsel for respondent No.6, on instructions, would submit that respondent No.6 is not interfering with the petitioner’s possession of the subject land. He would submit that the subject land is described as a cart track in the revenue records. He would submit that the Secretary of respondent No.6 shall follow due process of law. 5. Given the submissions of learned counsel for respondent No.6, keeping the writ petition pending does not serve any purpose. Hence, this writ petition is disposed of at the admission stage with the consent of learned counsel on either side, directing learned respondent No.6 not to dispossess the petitioner from the subject land, without following due process of law. No costs. As a sequel, pending miscellaneous petitions, if any, shall stand closed. ___________________________ JUSTICE SUBBA REDDY SATTI Date: 27.01.2026 IKN p. 5 SRS,J W.P.No.2264 of 2026 THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE SUBBA REDDY SATTI WRIT PETITION NO: 2264 of 2026 Date: 27.01.2026 IKN