Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Andhra Pradesh · body

2026 DAILYLAW 16017 (AP)

SHAIK ALI SAHEB v. THE STATE OF AP

WP/2132/2019 · 2026-03-29

Sumathi Jagadam

body2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

APHC010047322019 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3459] MONDAY,THE THIRTIETH DAY OF MARCH TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE SUMATHI JAGADAM WRIT PETITION NO: 2132/2019 Between: 1. SHAIK ALI SAHEB, S/O. MAHABOOB SAHEB, AGED ABOUT 65 YEARS, OCC. BUSINESS, RJO. DOOR NO.16-28-105, SURYARAO NAGAR, OLD GUNTUR, GUNTUR, GUNTUR DISTRICT. ...PETITIONER AND 1. THE STATE OF AP, REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE, SECRETARIAT BUILDINGS, VELAGAPUDI, GUNTUR DISTRICT. 2. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, GUNTUR DISTRICT, GUNTUR 3. THE TAHSILDAR, GUNTUR MANDAL, GUNTUR, GUNTUR DISTRICT. 4. THE GUNTUR MUNICIPAL CORPORATION, GUNTUR, REP., BY ITS COMMISSIONER ...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 one in nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the highhanded action on the part of the respondents No.3 and 4 in interfering with my rights over the house plot in an extent of 528.50 Square Yards in Sy.No.100/1 of R.Agraharam, Guntur, Guntur District eventhough the same is my private pattaland which was purchased by me through Sale Deed, dated 04-07-2010 registered as 2 JS,J W.P.No.2132/2019 Doc.No.5326 of 2010 as arbitrary, illegal, colorble exercise of power, apart from being voilative of fundamental rights guaranteed to me under Articles 14, 19 and 21 of the Constitution of India and consequently direct the respondents No.3 and 4 not to interfere with my rights over the house plot in an extent of 528.50 Square Yards in Sy.No.100/1 of R.Agraharam, Guntur, Guntur District IA NO: 1 OF 2019 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 direct the respondents No.3 and 4 not to interfere with my rights over the house plot in an extent of 528.50 Square Yards in Sy.No.100/1 of R.Agraharam, Guntur, Guntur District pending disposal of the above Writ Petition Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. P V N KIRAN KUMAR Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. GP FOR REVENUE (AP) 2. A PANDURANGA RAO 3 JS,J W.P.No.2132/2019 The Court made the following ORDER: When the matter is taken up for hearing, there was no representation for the petitioner. 2. Learned Assistant Government Pleader appearing for the respondents placed on record the written instructions bearing Rc.No.143/2026-B, dated 10.03.2026, which shows that the respondents are not interfering with the possession of the petitioner over the subject property i.e., house plot in an extent of 528.50 Square Yards in Sy.No.100/1 of R.Agraharam, Guntur, Guntur District, in view of the same, no further orders are required. 3. In view of the submissions of the learned Assistant Government Pleader, this Court determines that no further orders are necessary. 4. Accordingly, the writ petition is closed. There shall be no order as to costs. As a sequel, miscellaneous applications pending, if any, shall stand closed __________________________________ JUSTICE SUMATHI JAGADAM Dated: 30.03.2026 RSD 4 JS,J W.P.No.2132/2019 210 THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE SUMATHI JAGADAM WRIT PETITION NO: 2132/2019 Dated: 30.03.2026 RSD