Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Andhra Pradesh · body

2026 DAILYLAW 19147 (AP)

YELLAMRAJU RAMAKRISHNA RAJU v. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH

WP/7877/2026 · 2026-03-29

B Krishna Mohan

body2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

APHC010141772026 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3233] MONDAY,THE THIRTIETH DAY OF MARCH TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE B KRISHNA MOHAN WRIT PETITION NO: 7877/2026 Between: 1. YELLAMRAJU RAMAKRISHNA RAJU, S/O. YELLAMRAJU RAMA RAJU, AGED ABOUT 85 YEARS, R/O. PATURU VILLAGE, NANDALUR MANDAL, YSR KADAPA DISTRICT - 516150 ...PETITIONER AND 1. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, REVENUE DEPARTMENT, A.P. SECRETARIAT AT VELAGAPUDI, AMARAVATHI, GUNTUR DISTRICT - 522238 2. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, ANNAMAYYA DISTRICT, RAYACHOTI - 516270 3. THE JOINT COLLECTOR, KADAPA DISTRICT, KADAPA - 516001 4. THE REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER / SUBCOLLECTOR, RAJAMPET, ANNAMAYYA DISTRICT - 516115 5. THE TAHSILDAR, NANDALUR MANDAL, ANNAMAYYA DISTRICT - 516150 ...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 the of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the Respondent herein considering the Appeal and Interlocutory Application (Stay Petition) filed 2 BKM,J W.P.No.7877 of 2026 Petitioner against the Proceedings of the 4th Respondent in nature in not by the D.Dis.B3/1842/2025, dt.23.2.2025, wherein, the 4th Respondent dismissed the Appeal filed by the Petitioner and confirmed the Order, dt. 15.4.2025 and eviction of the Petitioner from the land an extent of dt.16.4.2025 for summary Ac.1.68 cents in Sy.No.930 of Paturu Village lands, Nandalur Mandal, Kadapa District under Section 6 of the A.P. LandDistrict, now in Annamayya Encroachment Act, 1905 as illegal, arbitrary and contrary to the Section 10(2) Encroachment Act, 1905 and consequently suspend theof A.P. Land impugned proceedings of the 5th Respondent in dt.15.4.2025 and Ref.No.B/133/2025 Roc.No.B/122/2025, dt.16.4.2025 and direct the 3rd Respondent to consider and dispose of the Appeal filed by the Petitioner 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 direct the 5th Respondent to not to dispossess the Petitioner from the land an extent of Ac.1.70 cents in Sy.No.930 of Patur Village, Nandalur Mandal, YSR Kadapa District, now in Annamayya District by suspendign the Procedings in Roc.No.B/122/2025, dt.15.4.2025 and Ref.No.B/133/2025, dt.16.4.2025 of the 5th Respondent and pass Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. G RAMESH BABU Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. GP FOR REVENUE 3 BKM,J W.P.No.7877 of 2026 The Court made the following Order: Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue appearing for the respondents. 2. This writ petition is filed questioning the non-disposal of the revision petition and the stay application filed in it by the 3rd respondent dated 13.03.2026. 3. The grievance of the petitioner is that against the proceedings of the 4th respondent dated 23.02.2025, the petitioner filed the above said revision before the 3rd respondent and the same is kept pending even without considering the stay application filed along with it. During the pendency of the appeal before the 4th respondent, the interim order was also granted by this Hon’ble Court in W.P.No.12842 of 2025 dated 08.05.2025. In view of the non- consideration of the stay application in the revision petition by the 3rd respondent so far, there is a threat of highhanded action by the 5th respondent with regard to the possession of the subject property. 4. On the other hand, the learned Assistant Government Pleader relying upon the written instructions of the 5th respondent submits that the matter is pending before the Revisional Authority i.e., the 3rd respondent. 5. In view of the above said facts and circumstances, the 3rd respondent is directed to consider and dispose of the revision petition filed by the petitioner herein dated 13.03.2026 strictly in accordance with law, by hearing all the 4 BKM,J W.P.No.7877 of 2026 parties concerned, including the petitioner, giving due opportunity, upon verification of the records and the subject land covered under the above said revision, appropriate orders shall be passed on its own merits as expeditiously as possible, preferably within a period of four (04) months from the date of receipt of this order. Pending the revision, there shall be an order of status quo as on today to be maintained with respect to the subject land covered under the said revision. The written instructions shall be made as part of the Court record. 6. Accordingly, this Writ Petition is disposed of. 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 30.03.2026 PGT