APHC010084882026 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3331] WEDNESDAY,THE EIGHTEENTH DAY OF FEBRUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE SUBBA REDDY SATTI WRIT PETITION NO: 4683/2026 Between: 1. SIVANANDA, S/O. LATE ERANNA, AGED ABOUT 51 YEARS, OCC CULTIVATION, R/O .D.NO.1-83, KORAREVU, H/O. HEMAVATHIVILLAGE AMARAPURAM MANDAL, SRI SATYA SAI DISTRICT, ERSTWHILE ANANTAPUR DISTRICT - 515286. ...PETITIONER AND 1. THE STATE OF AP, REP. BY THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, PANCHAYAT RAJ DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT BUILDINGS AT VELAGAPUDI, AMARAVATHI - 522237. 2. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, SRI SATYA SAI DISTRICT., AT PUTTAPARTHY, ERSTWHILE ANANTAPUR DISTRICT - 515134. 3. THE REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER, MADAKASIRA DIVISION, MADAKASIRA, SRI SATYA SAI DISTRICTERSTWHILE ANANTAPUR DISTRICT - 515301. 4. THE TAHSILDAR, AMARAPURAM MANDAL, SRI SATYA SAI DISTRICT, ERSTWHILE ANANTAPUR DISTRICT - 515281. 5. THE HEMAVATHI GRAMA PANCHYAT, HEMAVATHI VILLAGE, AMARAPURAM MANDAL, SRI SATHYA SAI DISTRICT ERSTWHILE ANANTAPUR DISTRICT REPRESENTED BY ITS PANCHAYAT SECRETARY - 515281. ...RESPONDENT(S): p. 2 SRS,J 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 order, writ or direction more particularly in the nature of Writ of Mandamus Under Article 226 of the Constitution of India questioning the action of the respondents in seeking dispossession of the petitioner from his house property in an extent of Ac.0.03 cents in Sy.No.369/2 bounded by East Chittamma House, West Chikkanna House, North Rangaswamy House, South Shivalingappa House situated at Korarevu, H/o. Hemavathi Village, Amarapuram Mandal, Sri Sathya Sai District Erstwhile Anantapur District without following any procedure under law and without issuing any notice or any proceedings as illegal, arbitrary and against to principles of natural justice and against to principles of natural justice and violative of Article 14, 21 and 300-A of Constitution of India and consequently direct the respondents not to dispossess the petitioner from the above said property without following due process of law and 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 not to dispossess the petitioner from his house property in an extent of Ac.0.03 cents in Sy.No.369/2 bounded by East: Chittamma House, West: Chikkanna House, North: Rangaswamy House, South: Shivalingappa House situated at Korarevu, H/o. Hemavathi Village, Amarapuram Mandal, Sri Sathya Sai District Erstwhile Anantapur District, pending disposal of writ petition and pass Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. P NARAHARI BABU Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. GP FOR PANCHAYAT RAJ RURAL DEV 2. GP FOR REVENUE The Court made the following: p. 3 SRS,J ::ORDER :: Heard Sri P. Narahari Babu, learned counsel for the petitioner; Sri P. Rajesh Kumar, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Panchayat Raj, for respondent No.1; Ms. P. Usha, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue for respondents 2 to 4, and Sri P. Nithin, learned counsel representing Sri M. Sudhir, learned standing counsel for respondent No.5. 2. The grievance of the petitioner is that the Panchayat Secretary of respondent No.5 is attempting to dispossess the petitioner from house bearing door No.1-83, in an extent of Ac.0-03 cents, in survey No.369/2, Korarevu, H/o Hemavathi Village, Amarapuram Mandal, Sri Sathya Sai District, Erstwhile Anantapur District, without following due process of law. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the then Tahsildar issued a possession certificate vide L.Dis.No.10/1313/2006 dated 18.04.2006 (Ex.P1). Thereafter, the petitioner constructed a house and respondent No.5 assigned a door number. The house was assessed for taxes, and the petitioner has been paying taxes regularly. While the matter stood thus, on 11.02.2026, the Panchayat Secretary of respondent No.5 came to the petitioner’s house and tried to dispossess the petitioner without following due process of law. 4. Learned counsel for respondent No.5 submitted instructions of respondent No.5. 5. A perusal of the instructions would indicate that the Panchayat Secretary of respondent No.5 never made any attempt to dispossess the petitioner from the subject property. The instructions are made part of the record. p. 4 SRS,J 6. Given the instructions furnished by respondent No.5, since the authority is not trying to dispossess the petitioner, this writ petition is disposed of at the admission stage with the consent of learned counsel on either side, directing respondent No.5 not to interfere with the petitioner’s possession of the subject property, without following due process of law. No costs. As a sequel, pending miscellaneous petitions, if any, shall stand closed. ___________________________ JUSTICE SUBBA REDDY SATTI Date: 18.02.2026 IKN p. 5 SRS,J THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE SUBBA REDDY SATTI WRIT PETITION NO: 4683 of 2026 Date: 18.02.2026 IKN