Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Andhra Pradesh · body

2026 DAILYLAW 18142 (AP)

GUDABANDI APPARAO v. The State of Andhra Pradesh

WP/5717/2026 · 2026-02-26

B Krishna Mohan

body2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

APHC010106012026 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3233] FRIDAY,THE TWENTY SEVENTH DAY OF FEBRUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE B KRISHNA MOHAN WRIT PETITION NO: 5717/2026 Between: 1. GUDABANDI APPARAO, S/O. GUDABANDI DHARMAYYA, AGED 45 YEARS, OCC CULTIVATION, R/O H.NO. 2-103, DHARAPALEM POST, RAMBILLI MANDALAM, PANCHADARALA VILLAGE, VISAKHAPATNAM DISTRICT, ANDHRA PRADESH-531061 2. MACHCHA LAKSHMI,, W/O. MACHCHA DASU, AGED 46 YEARS, OCC CULTIVATION, R/O H.NO. 2-85, DHARAPALEM POST, RAMBILLI MANDALAM, PANCHADARALA VILLAGE, VISAKHAPATNAM DISTRICT, ANDHRA PRADESH-531061 3. ANANTHARAPU ARJUNA RAO,, S/O. A. CHINA KONDADU, AGED 54 YEARS, OCC CULTIVATION, R/O H.NO. 2-823, DHARAPALEM POST, RAMBILLI MANDALAM, PANCHADARALA VILLAGE, VISAKHAPATNAM DISTRICT, ANDHRA PRADESH-531061. 4. ANANTHARAPU NOOKALU, , S/O. ANANTARAPU SIMHACHALAM, AGED 56 YEARS, .OCC CULTIVATION, R/O H.NO. 2-83, DHARAPALEM POST, S C COLONY, RAMBILLI MANDALAM, PANCHADARALA VILLAGE, VISAKHAPATNAM DISTRICT, ANDHRA PRADESH-531061. 5. GUDISE KANNARAO,, S/O. GUDISE APPANNA, AGED 50 YEARS, OCC CULTIVATION, R/O H.NO. 00, DHARAPALEM POST, RAMBILLI MANDALAM, PANCHADARALA VILLAGE, VISAKHAPATNAM DISTRICT, ANDHRA PRADESH-531061 6. CHAPALA NARAYANAMMA, , W/O. CH. APPARAO LATE, AGED 55 YEARS, OCC CULTIVATION, R/O H.NO. 2-103, DHARAPALEM 2 HBKM,J W.P.No.5717 of 2026 POST, RAMBILLI MANDALAM, PANCHADARALA VILLAGE, VISAKHAPATNAM DISTRICT, ANDHRA PRADESH-531061 7. KOLLI APPALANARSA,, W/O. KOLLI SURIBABU, AGED 51 YEARS, OCC CULTIVATION, R/O H.NO. 25-92, HOUSING COLONY. WARD 15, KASIMKOTA MANDALAM, KASIMKOTA, VISAKHAPATNAM DISTRICT, ANDHRA PRADESH-531031. 8. JALLURI SIMHACHALAM,, W/O. JALLURI SIMHACHALAM, AGED 78 YEARS, R/O H.NO. 1-29, DHARAPALEM POST, RAMBILLI MANDALAM, PANCHADARALA VILLAGE, VISAKHAPATNAM DISTRICT, ANDHRA PRADESH-531061 . 9. GUDABANDI SAYAMMA,, W/O. G. SURIBABU, AGED 55 YEARS, OCC CULTIVATION, R/O H.NO.2-104, DHARAPALEM POST, RAMBILLI MANDALAM, RAMBILLI, VISAKHAPATNAM DISTRICT, ANDHRA PRADESH-531061. 10. JALLURI DURGALAMMA,, W/O. JALLURI APPARAO, AGED 70 YEARS, R/O H.NO. 0-00, DHARAPALEM POST, S C COLONY, RAMBILLI MANDALAM, PANCHADARALA VILLAGE, VISAKHAPATNAM DISTRICT, ANDHRA PRADESH-531061. 11. GARAPATI APPAYAMMA,, W/O. G. RAMULU, AGED 66 YEARS, R/O H.NO. 2-92, DHARAPALEM POST, RAMBILLI MANDALAM, PANCHADARALA VILLAGE, VISAKHAPATNAM DISTRICT, ANDHRA PRADESH-531061. 12. GUTALA APPALANARASA, , W/O. G. APPARAO, AGED 59 YEARS, OCC CULTIVATION, R/O H.NO..., DHARAPALEM POST, RAMBILLI MANDALAM, PANCHADARLA VILLAGE, VISAKHAPATNAM DISTRICT- 531061. 13. GUTALA LAXMI,, W/O. GUTALA ABBAI, AGED 68 YEARS, OCC CULTIVATION, R/O H.NO. 2-94, DHARAPALEM POST, RAMBILLI MANDALAM, PANCHADARALA VILLAGE, VISAKHAPATNAM DISTRICT, ANDHRA PRADESH-531061. 14. ANANTARAPU NOOKALAMMA,, W/O. ANANTARAPU KONDAYYA, AGED 55 YEARS, OCC CULTIVATION, R/O H.NO. 1-36, DHARAPALEM POST, RAMBILLI MANDALAM, PANCHADARALA VILLAGE, VISAKHAPATNAM DISTRICT, ANDHRA PRADESH- 3 HBKM,J W.P.No.5717 of 2026 531061 15. TERAPALLI SIMHACHALAM,, W/O. TERAPALLI NARAYANA, AGED 79 YEARS, R/O H.NO.2-87, DHARAPALEM POST, RAMBILLI MANDALAM, PANCHADARALA , VISAKHAPATNAM DISTRICT, ANDHRA PRADESH-531061. 16. G. ANAND KUMAR,, S/O. G. SIMHACHALAM, AGED 39 YEARS, OCC CULTIVATION, R/O 67-26-709, MUNICIPAL SCHOOL, SIMHACHAL NAGAR, RAJAMAHENDRAVARAM (URBAN), RAJAMAHENDRAVARAM, EAST GODAVARI DISTRICT, ANDHRA PRADESH- 533101 ...PETITIONER(S) AND 1. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REPRESENTED BY PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, REVENUE DEPARTMENT, A.P. SECRETARIAT BUILDINGS, AMARAVATI - 522503. 2. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, ANAKAPALLI, ANAKAPALLI DISTRICT - 531001. 3. THE REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER, ANAKAPALLI REVENUE DIVISION, ANAKAPALLI, ANAKAPALLI DISTRICT - 531001. 4. THE TAHSILDAR, RAMBILLI MANDAL, ANAKAPALLI DISTRICT - 531061. ...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 tomay be pleased to issue an appropriate writ of mandamus declaring the action of the respondents in interfering with the peaceful possession and enjoyment of their lands of 1st petitioner in Sy.No.2-11 admeasuring an extent of Ac.1.42 cents, 2nd petitioner in Sy.No.2-1 an extent of Ac.2.78 cents, 3 petitioner in Sy.No.2-21 an extent of Ac.1.38 cents, 4 petitioner in Sy.No. 2-21 an extent of Ac.1.38 cents, 5 petitioner in Sy.No.2- 11 an extent of Ac.1.00 cents, 6th petitioner in Sy.No.2-11 an extent of Ac.0.35 cents, 7 petitioner in Sy.No.2-23 an extent of 2.77 cents, 8 petitioner in Sy.No.2-2 an extent of Ac.2.78 cents, 9 petitioner in Sy.No.2- 4 an extent of 4 HBKM,J W.P.No.5717 of 2026 Ac.2.78 cents, 10 petitioner in Sy.No.2-6 admeasuring an extent of Ac.2.78 cents, 11 petitioner in Sy.No.2-10 extent of Ac. 1.52 cents and Sy.No.2-8b an extent of Ac. 1.25 cents, 12 petitioner in Sy.No.2-14 an extent of Ac.1.40 cents, 13 petitioner in Sy.No.2-17 an extent of Ac.2.77 cents, 14 petitioner in Sy.No.2-21 an extent of Ac.1.38 cents, 15 petitioner in Sy.No.2-7 an extent of Ac.2.78 cents and 16 petitioner in Sy.No.2-22an extent of Ac.2.77 cents as illegal, arbitrary and unconstitutionaland contrary to the procedure established.by law and in violation of articles 14, 19 and 300-A of the Constitution of India and consequently direct the respondents not to interfere with the petitioners lands i.e., 1st petitioner in Sy.No.2-11 admeasuring an extent of Ac.1.42 cents, 2 petitioner in Sy.No.2-1 an extent of Ac.2.78 cents, 3rd petitioner in Sy.No.2-21 an extent of Ac.1.38 cents, 4 petitioner in Sy.No. 2-21 an extent of Ac.1.38 cents, 5th petitioner in Sy.No.2-11 an extent of Ac.1.00 cents, 6 petitioner in Sy.No.2-11 an extent of Ac.0.35 cents, 7 petitioner in Sy.No.2-23 an extent of 2.77 cents, 8 petitioner in Sy.No.2-2 an extent of Ac.2.78 cents, 9th petitioner in Sy.No.2-4 an extent of Ac.2.78 cents, 10 petitioner in Sy.No.2-6 admeasuring an extent of Ac.2.78 cents, 11 petitioner in Sy.No.2-10 extent of Ac.1.52 cents and Sy.No.2-8b an extent of Ac.1.25 cents, 12 petitioner in Sy.No.2-14an extent of Ac. 1.40 cents, 13 petitioner in Sy.No.2-17 an extent of Ac.2.77 cents, 14thth petitioner in Sy.No.2-21 an extent of Ac.1.38 cents, 15 petitioner in Sy.No.2-7 an extent of Ac.2.78 cents and 16 petitioner in Sy.No.2-22 an extent of Ac.2.77 cents and to pass such 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 may be pleased to direct the respondents not to interfere with the petitioners lands i.e., 1st petitioner in Sy.No.2-11 admeasuring an extent of Ac.1.42 cents, 2nd petitioner in Sy.No.2- 1 an extent of Ac.2.78 cents, 3rd petitioner in Sy.No.2-21 an extent of Ac.1.38 cents, 4th petitioner in Sy.No. 2-21 an extent of Ac.1.38 cents, 5th petitioner in Sy.No.2-11 an extent of Ac.1.00 cents, 6th petitioner in Sy.No.2-11 an extent of Ac.0.35 cents, 7th petitioner in Sy.No.2-23 an extent of 2.77 cents, 8th petitioner in Sy.No.2-2 an extent of Ac.2.78 cents, 9thpetitioner in Sy.No.2-4 an extent of Ac.2.78 cents, 10th petitioner in Sy.No.2-6 admeasuring an extent of Ac.2.78 cents, 11th petitioner in Sy.No.2-10 extent of Ac.1.52 cents and Sy.No.2-8b an extent of Ac.1.25 cents, 12th petitioner in Sy.No.2-14 an extent of Ac.1.40 cents, 13th petitioner in Sy.No.2-17 an extent of Ac.2.77 cents, 14th petitioner in 5 HBKM,J W.P.No.5717 of 2026 Sy.No.2-21 an extent of Ac.1.38 cents, 15th petitioner in Sy.No.2-7 an extent of Ac.2.78 cents and 16th petitioner in Sy.No.2-22 an extent of Ac.2.77 cents pending disposal of the main writ petition and be pleased to pass such Counsel for the Petitioner(S): 1. SRAVAN KUMAR NAIDANA Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. GP FOR REVENUE 6 HBKM,J W.P.No.5717 of 2026 The Court made the following: Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue appearing for the respondents. 2. This writ petition is filed questioning the action of the respondents in trying to interfere with the possession of the petitioners’ lands, i.e., the 1st petitioner in Sy.No.2-11 to an extent of Ac.1.42 cents, the 2nd petitioner in Sy.No.2-1 to an extent of Ac.2.78 cents, the 3rd petitioner in Sy.No.2-21 to an extent of Ac.1.38 cents, the 4th petitioner in Sy.No.2-21 to an extent of Ac.1.38 cents, the 5th petitioner in Sy.No.2-11 to an extent of Ac.1.00 and Ac.1.38 cents, the 6th petitioner in Sy.No.2-11 to an extent of Ac.0.35 cents, the 7th petitioner in Sy.No.2-23 to an extent of 2.77 cents, the 8th petitioner in Sy.No.2-2 to an extent of Ac.2.78 cents, the 9th petitioner in Sy.No.2-4 to an extent of Ac.2.78 cents, the 10th petitioner in Sy.No.2-6 to an extent of Ac.2.78 cents, the 11th petitioner in Sy.No.2-10 to an extent of Ac.1.52 cents and Sy.No.2-8b to an extent of Ac.1.25 cents, the 12th petitioner in Sy.No.2-14 to an extent of Ac.1.40 cents, the 13th petitioner in Sy.No.2-17 to an extent of Ac.2.77 cents, the 14th petitioner in Sy.No.2-21 to an extent of Ac.1.38 cents, the 15th petitioner in Sy.No.2-7 to an extent of Ac.2.78 cents and the 16th petitioner in Sy.No.2-22 to an extent of Ac.2.77 cents. 7 HBKM,J W.P.No.5717 of 2026 2. The learned counsel for the petitioners submits that in respect of these subject lands different proceedings of resumption orders were passed by the 4th respondent dated 16.12.2025 affecting the possession of the petitioners individually. Hence, this writ petition. 3. On the other hand, the learned Assistant Government Pleader appearing for the respondents submits that the proceedings of the 4th respondent dated 16.12.2025 are not under challenge in this writ petition and they are only questioning the action without availing the remedy of appeals before the 3rd respondent within a period of thirty (30) days from the date of receipt of the said orders. If the petitioners prefer appeals, the same would be considered by the appellate authority by following the due procedure. 4. In view of the above said facts and circumstances, the petitioners are directed to prefer appeals before the 3rd respondent/appellate authority against the orders of the 4th respondent dated 16.12.2025 within a period of four (04) weeks from the date of receipt of this order. In this writ petition, only one proceedings of the 4th respondent dated 16.12.2025 in respect of the 1st petitioner was filed, but the learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the similar orders were passed in respect of the other petitioners covering the subject lands. Wherever such orders are passed, the only remedy available to the petitioners is to prefer appeals before the concerned appellate authority, if they are so aggrieved. In view of the same, the petitioners are permitted to prefer appeals against the proceedings of the 4th respondent dated 16.12.2025, in the matter of violation of Assignment conditions under BSO 15 8 HBKM,J W.P.No.5717 of 2026 Notices, before the 3rd respondent/appellate authority within a period of four (04) weeks from the date of receipt of this order, enclosing all the necessary documents in support of their claim. On receipt of the same, the appellate authority shall consider and dispose of the said appeals strictly in accordance with law by hearing all the parties concerned including the petitioners giving due opportunity, upon verification of the records and the subject lands appropriate decision shall be taken on their own merits as expeditiously as possible preferably within a period of three (03) months thereafter. Till filing of the above said appeals within the above said stipulated time only, there shall be an order of status quo as on today to be maintained with respect to the subject lands. In default of preferring the above said appeals within the above said stipulated time, the interim protection granted by this Court stands automatically vacated. The interim relief and main relief in the appeals shall be considered by the appellate authority on their own merits. 4. Accordingly, this writ petition is disposed of. The Interim order, if any, deemed to have been vacated. There shall be no order as to costs. As a sequel, Interlocutory Applications pending, if any, shall stand closed. __________________________ JUSTICE B. KRISHNA MOHAN 27.02.2026 RMD 9 HBKM,J W.P.No.5717 of 2026 141 THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE B KRISHNA MOHAN WRIT PETITION NO: 5717/2026 27.02.2026 RMD