SRI.TALARI RANGANNA,KURNOOL DISTRICT v. THE COMMISSIONER, ENDOWMENTS DEPT., & 5 OTHERS
WP/26699/2011 · 2026-02-10
Venkateswarlu Nimmagadda
body2026
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2026 DAILYLAW 19674 (AP) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2026 DAILYLAW 19674 (AP) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE VENKATESWARLU NIMMAGADDA
WRIT PETITION NO.26699 OF 2011 ORDER:
1. This writ petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking the following relief: <to issue a writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of WRIT OF MANDAMUS Writ declaring the action of the respondent Nos.1 to 4 in interfering and trying to dispossess the petitioner over the land in Sy.No.59 admeasuring Ac.12-28 cents situated in Govardhanagiri Village, Veldurthy Mandal, Kurnool District without following the procedure established by law as bad and void and consequently direct the respondents not to take any forcible action to dispossess the petitioner from the land in Sy.No.59 admeasuring Ac.12-28 cents situated in Govardhanagiri Village, Veldurthy Mandal, Kurnool District.=
2. During hearing, learned counsel for the petitioner, without touching the merits of the case, requested this Court to issue a direction to the respondents not to dispossess the petitioner from his land, without following due process of law.
3. Learned Government Pleader for Endowments submits that, in the event the respondents propose to evict the petitioner, the respondents would follow due process of law and requested to pass appropriate orders.
2
4. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned Government Pleader for Endowments, and perused the material available on record.
5. When the petitioner is in settled possession and enjoyment of the property, he cannot be dispossessed, without following due process of law, in view of the law declared by the Apex Court in <Rame Gowda (dead) by L.Rs. v. M.Varadappa Naidu (Dead) by L.Rs.1=. Therefore, if the petitioner is in possession of the subject property, the respondents are directed not to dispossess the petitioner from the subject property, except by due process of law.
6. With the above direction, the writ petition is disposed of, with the consent of both the counsel. No costs.
7. Consequently, miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shall also stand closed. ___________________________________________ JUSTICE VENKATESWARLU NIMMAGADDA Date:11.02.2026
SP
1 2004 (1) SCC 769