APHC010107322020 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3458] FRIDAY, THE SIXTH DAY OF MARCH TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE KIRANMAYEE MANDAVA WRIT PETITION NO: 6621 OF 2020 Between: 1. VEGESNA VENKATA SATYA KANAKA DURGA NAGA SOMARAJU,, S/O. SUNDARA RAMA RAJU, HINDU, AGED 57 YEARS, R/O. 27-5- 27, TADIMALLA VARI STREET, NEAR IDEA CELL TOWER, SRIRAM PURAM, BHIMAVARAM - 2, WEST GODAVARI DISTRICT. ...PETITIONER AND 1. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, REVENUE DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT, AMARAVATHI, GUNTUR DISTRICT. 2. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, ELURU, WEST GODAVARI DISTRICT. 3. THE TAHSILDAR, JANGAREDDIGUDEM MANDAL, WEST GODAVARI DISTRICT. 4. THE REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER, JANGAREDDIGUDEM, WEST GODAVARI DISTRICT. ...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 toto issue Writ, Order, or Direction more particularly one in the nature of WRIT OF MANDAMUS declaring the action of the respondents in trying to disposes the petitioner from the petitioner property by 3rd respondent under guise of an impugned oral proceedings of the 2nd and 4th respondents in R.S. No.605/1 an extent of acres 2-00 cents in Jangareddigudem Village and Mandal, West Godavari District under Land Acquisition Act with intention to wrongful loss to the petitioner on the ground of 'Government Lands', as illegal, improper, unjust, arbitrary, violative of Article 300-A 86 21 of the Constitution of India and pass 2 IA NO: 1 OF 2020 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 to direct to 3rd Respondent not to disposes the petitioner From the petitioner's property, without due course of law in R.S. Nos. 605/1 an extent of acres 2-00 cents in Jangareddigudem Village and Mandal, West Godavari District under Land Acquisition Act, pending disposal of the above Writ Petition as pass Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. GANDHAM SR PRASAD Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. GP FOR REVENUE (AP) The Court made the following order: Heard Sri Gandham SR Prasad, learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue appearing for the respondents. 2. The claim of the petitioner in the instant writ petition is that respondent No.3 is interfering with the possession and occupation in respect of the subject property under the oral directions of respondent Nos. 2 and 4. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner contends that, in respect of the subject property, to an extent of Ac.0.20 cents in R.S.No.605/1 in Jangareddigudem Village and Mandal, West Godavari District, a patta was granted by the A.P. Bhoodan Yagna Board vide proceedings dated 21.10.2013. Since then, the petitioner has been in occupation and possession of the said property. However, respondent No.3 is unauthorizedly interfering with the possession, and thus filed the instant writ petition. 3 4. In support of the said claim, the petitioner relies on a Gazette Notification issued by the Government of Andhra Pradesh dated 12.03.1970, which clearly shows that an extent of Ac.1.00 in Sy.No.605/A was donated by one Parvatham Venkateshwar Rao of Jangareddigudem Village. It also reflects that an extent of Ac.2.00 cents in Sy.No.605/A was donated by one Parvatham Surya Prakash Rao of Jangareddigudem Village on 23.09.1955. 5. Having regard to the same, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the respondents have no manner of right in interfering with the possession of the petitioner over the subject property. 6. Today, when the matter was taken up for consideration, the learned Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue appearing for the respondents has placed before this Court a copy of the written instructions received from the 3rd respondent dated 20.02.2026. A perusal of the same would reflect that, even according to the respondents, one Mutyala Subba Rao is the pattadar in respect of the land in Sy.No.605/1A to an extent of Ac.3.52 cents and Ac.0.71 cents in Sy.No.605/1B. It is further stated that there are no records to show that the said land is Bhoodan land, and that the subject land is in the possession of Mutyala Subba Rao. 7. It is further stated that there is no Bhoodan land in Jangareddigudem Village, and that no allotment has been made by the Bhoodan Yagna Board in respect of the subject survey numbers. However, along with the written instructions, the respondents have placed before this Court a copy of the 1-B 4 Adangal, and Encumbrance Certificate (EC). A perusal of the same would reflect that one Mutyala Subba Rao is shown as the pattadar in respect of Ac.3.52 cents in Sy.No.605/1A. 8. In any event, from the documents annexed to the said instructions, it appears that the subject land is not Government land, even according to the respondents. The respondents have stated in the written instructions that one Mutyala Subba Rao is the pattadar of the land. 9. Having regard to the same, the respondents shall not interfere with the petitioner’s possession of the subject property, as the petitioner claims to be in possession by virtue of the pattas and documents issued in favour of the petitioner and since the land is not shown as Government land. However, if the respondents find that the subject land is Government land and that the petitioner is in unauthorized occupation of the property, they shall follow due process of law for eviction of the petitioner. Till such time, the respondents shall not dispossess the petitioner from the subject property. 10. With the above observation, the writ petition is disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs. As a sequel, miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending shall stand closed. _____________________________ JUSTICE KIRANMAYEE MANDAVA Date: 06.03.2026 BSK 5 78 THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE KIRANMAYEE MANDAVA WRIT PETITION NO: 6621 OF 2020 Date: 06.03.2026 BSK