Kandibotla Surya Rao, v. The State of Andhra Pradesh,
WP/5105/2026 · 2026-05-05
B Krishna Mohan
Public Interest Litigationbody2026
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2026 DAILYLAW 1918 (AP) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2026 DAILYLAW 1918 (AP) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
APHC010085962026
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3233] WEDNESDAY, THE SIXTH DAY OF MAY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE B KRISHNA MOHAN WRIT PETITION NO: 5105/2026 Between:
1. KANDIBOTLA SURYA RAO,, S/O SURANNA, AGED ABOUT 80 YEARS R/O D.NO. 2-87, NARSIPUDI VILLAGE, ALAMURU MANDAL, DR. B.R. AMBEDKAR KONASEEMA DISTRICT
2. KANDIBOTLA SRINIVASA RAO,, S/O JANARDHANA RAO, AGED ABOUT 61 YEARS, R/O D.NO. 2-86, NARSIPUDI VILLAGE, ALAMURU MANDAL, DR. B.R. AMBEDKAR KONASEEMA DISTRICT
3. CHALAPATHI VENKATA RAMANA,, S/O NARAYUDU, AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS, R/O D.NO. 2-80, NARSIPUDI VILLAGE, ALAMURU MANDAL, DR. B.R. AMBEDKAR KONASEEMA DISTRICT
4. VANUM SRINIVAS,, S/O NUKA RAJU, AGED ABOUT 35 YEARS R/O D.NO. 2-74, NARSIPUDI VILLAGE, ALAMURU MANDAL, DR. B.R. AMBEDKAR KONASEEMA DISTRICT
5. CHALLA PARVATHI,, W/O SATYANARAYANA, AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS, R/O D.NO. 2-10, NARSIPUDI VILLAGE, ALAMURU MANDAL, DR. B.R. AMBEDKAR KONASEEMA DISTRICT
6. NAKKA RATNAM,, W/O SATYANARAYANA, AGED ABOUT 48 YEARS R/O D.NO. 2-76, NARSIPUDI VILLAGE, ALAMURU MANDAL, DR. B.R. AMBEDKAR KONASEEMA DISTRICT
7. CHALAPATHI LAKSHMANA RAO,, S/O VEERRAJU, AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS R/O D.NO. 2-66/1, NARSIPUDI VILLAGE, ALAMURU MANDAL, DR. B.R. AMBEDKAR KONASEEMA DISTRICT
2
8. GUTTULA NAGESWARA RAO,, S/O SUBBARAO, AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS R/O D.NO. 1-124/1, NARSIPUDI VILLAGE, ALAMURU MANDAL, DR. B.R. AMBEDKAR KONASEEMA DISTRICT
9. PILLI ANANTHA LAKSHMI,, W/O RAMADASU, AGED ABOUT 60 YEARS R/O D.NO. 2-81, NARSIPUDI VILLAGE, ALAMURU MANDAL, DR. B.R. AMBEDKAR KONASEEMA DISTRICT
10. CHITTURI KANAKA LAKSHMI,, W/O VANKATA RAO, AGED ABOUT 52 YEARS, R/O D.NO. 2-83, NARSIPUDI VILLAGE, ALAMURU MANDAL, DR. B.R. AMBEDKAR KONASEEMA DISTRICT
11. BALI SRIRAMULU,, S/O PERAYYA, AGED ABOUT 75 YEARS, R/O D.NO. 2-78, NARSIPUDI VILLAGE, ALAMURU MANDAL, DR. B.R. AMBEDKAR KONASEEMA DISTRICT
12. CHELLIBOYINA SATYANARAYANA,, S/O SATYAM, AGED ABOUT 65 YEARS, R/O D.NO. 2-85, NARSIPUDI VILLAGE, ALAMURU MANDAL, DR. B.R. AMBEDKAR KONASEEMA DISTRICT
13. PILLI SURYAKANTHAM,, W/O NAGESWARA RAO, AGED ABOUT 85 YEARS R/O D.NO. 2-82, NARSIPUDI VILLAGE, ALAMURU MANDAL, DR. B.R. AMBEDKAR KONASEEMA DISTRICT
14. KADA RAMA KRISHNA,, S/O SURYANARAYANA, AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS, R/O D.NO. 2-84, NARSIPUDI VILLAGE, ALAMURU MANDAL, DR. B.R. AMBEDKAR KONASEEMA DISTRICT
15. KANDIBOTLA SURYANARAYANA,, S/O PERAYYA, AGED ABOUT 75 YEARS R/O D.NO. 2-77, NARSIPUDI VILLAGE, ALAMURU MANDAL, DR. B.R. AMBEDKAR KONASEEMA DISTRICT
...PETITIONER(S) AND
1. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, REVENUE DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT BUILDINGS, VELAGAPUDI, AMARAVATI, GUNTUR DISTRICT – 522237
3
2. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, DR.
B.R. AMBEDKAR KONASEEMA DISTRICT,
AMALAPURAM, DR. B.R.
AMBEDKAR KONASEEMA DISTRICT - 533201
3. THE REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER, KOTHAPETA, DR. B.R.
AMBEDKAR KONASEEMA DISTRICT - 533223
4. THE TAHASILDAR, ALAMURU MANDAL, DR. B.R. AMBEDKAR KONASEEMA DISTRICT - 533233
5. THE STATION HOUSE OFFICER, ALAMURU PS, DR. B.R.
AMBEDKAR KONASEEMA DISTRICT - 533233
6. NARSIPUDI GRAMA PANCHAYATH, REP BY ITS SECRETARY, ALAMURU MANDAL, DR. B.R. AMBEDKAR KONASEEMA DISTRICT - 533232
...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 a writ of mandamus or any appropriate writ or order that declaring the action of the official respondents without following due process of law and not considering the our representation dated 02-02-2026 and taking steps for demolition of our houses which are door Nos. 2-87, 2-86, 2-80, 1-125, 2-10, 2-76, 2-56/1, 1- 124/1, 2-81, 2-83, 2-78, 2-85, 2-82, 2-84, 2-77, Narsipudi village, Alamuru Mandal, Dr. B.R. Ambedkar Konaseema District is illegal, arbitrary, violation of principles of natural justice and contrary to the provisions under Articles 14,16,19(1)(g) of the Constitution of India and contrary to the Andhra Pradesh Land Encroachment Act 1905 and consequently directing the official respondents that follow due process of law for taking any steps with regard to the properties bearing door Nos. 2-87, 2-86, 2-80, 1-125, 2-10, 2- 76, 2-56/1, 1-124/1, 2-81, 2-83, 2-78, 2-85, 2-82, 2-84, 2-77, Narsipudi village, Alamuru Mandal, Dr.
B.R. Ambedkar Konaseema District and 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 Direct the Respondents to consider the Petitioners’ representation dated 02.02.2026 pending disposal of the above writ petition and pass such
4
IA NO: 2 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 dispossess the Petitioners from their respective houses bearing Door Nos. 2- 87, 2-86, 2-80, 1-125, 2-10, 2-76, 2-56/1, 1-124/1, 2-81, 2-83, 2-78, 2-85, 2- 82, 2-84, 2-77 situated at Narsipudi village, Alamuru Mandal, Dr. B.R. Ambedkar Konaseema District , and to restrain them from taking any coercive steps, including the demolition of the said houses, pending disposal of the main Writ Petition, and pass Counsel for the Petitioner(S):
1. R K ACHARYULU Counsel for the Respondent(S):
1. GP FOR REVENUE
5
The Court made the following Order:
Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned Assistant Government Pleader for the respondent Nos.1 to 4. 2. This writ petition is filed questioning the action of the respondents without following the due process of law and not considering the representation dated 02-02-2026, taking steps for demolition of houses of the petitioners bearing door Nos. 2-87, 2-86, 2-80, 1-125, 2-10, 2-76, 2-56/1, 1-124/1, 2-81, 2-83, 2-78, 2-85, 2-82, 2-84, 2-77, Narsipudi village, Alamuru Mandal, Dr. B.R. Ambedkar Konaseema District. 3. On the other hand, the learned Assistant Government Pleader relying upon the written instructions of the 4th respondent dated 05.05.2026 submits that, certain house structures bearing door Nos. 2- 87, 2-86, 2-80, 1-125, 2-10, 2-76, 2-56/1, 1-124/1, 2-81, 2-83, 2-78, 2- 85, 2-82, 2-84, 2-77, Narsipudi village are situated in and around the Gudi Cheruvu bund area, which is classified as government land. As per the village revenue records and FMB sketch, the land in question is classified as cheruvu poramboke/ tank bund area which is government property meant for public purpose. The petitioners do not have valid title over the said government land.
The alleged pattas referred to by them are under verification and do not confer any right over the tank bed/ bund land, if any such assignment was erroneously made. Upon receipt of complaints from the local residents regarding encroachments
6
affecting the safety of the tank bund, a preliminary inspection was conducted by the Mandal Revenue Inspector and Mandal Surveyor, Village Surveyor, Narsipudi, Panchayati Secretary, Narsipudi and Village Revenue Officer, Narsipudi. Basing upon the field inspection, it was found that certain constructions appear to be located within prohibited limits of the tank bund area. 4. Therefore, as per procedure and in compliance with principles of natural justice, show cause notices were issued by the 6th respondent dated 06.02.2026 to the concerned individuals calling for explanation within 15 days from the date of receipt of the same. No demolition or dispossession action has been carried out as on date. The matter is under examination and further action if any will be taken strictly in accordance with law. 5. In view of the above said facts and circumstances, recording the said instructions of the 4th respondent dated 05.05.2026 no further orders are necessary in this writ petition. 6. Accordingly, the 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, Miscellaneous Petitions pending, if any, shall stand closed. _________________________ JUSTICE B KRISHNA MOHAN
7
06.05.2026 NNN