APHC010181182023 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3460] TUESDAY,THE TWENTY FOURTH DAY OF FEBRUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE NYAPATHY VIJAY WRIT PETITION NO: 9239/2023 Between: Kura Somanna Dora, ...PETITIONER AND The State Of Andhra Pradesh and Others ...RESPONDENT(S) Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. K VENKATESH Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. GP FOR REVENUE 2. GP FOR SOCIAL WELFARE The Court made the following: 2 THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE NYAPATHY VIJAY W.P. No.9239 of 2023 O R DE R: 1. The Writ Petition is filed to declare the action of the Respondent Nos. 2 and 3 in seeking to dispossess the Petitioner from his land over an extent of Ac.7.63 cents in Sy.No.52-3 situated in Gopavaram Village, Rampachodavaram Mandal, Alluri Seetha Rama Raju District, as illegal and arbitrary. 2. It is stated that the Petitioner belongs to Scheduled Tribe Community and is owner and possessor of the above mentioned land. As there is a threat from the Respondent Nos. 2 and 3, he filed the present Writ Petition. 3. In the Counter Affidavit filed by the Respondent No.2, it is stated that the Petitioner had filed O.S.No.1 of 2023 before the Agency Divisional Officer-cum-Sub Divisional Magistrate, Rampachodavaram, for permanent injunction against the Respondents herein. The said suit was dismissed by the said Court vide Order dated 05.12.2005 and the same was confirmed by the Appellate Court in A.S.No.02 of 2006 on 09.08.2010. 4. Heard the learned Assistant Government Pleader. 3 5. O.S.No.01 of 2003 filed by the Petitioner was dismissed on 05.12.2005 as mentioned above and the appeal thereon i.e., A.S.No.2 of 2006 was also dismissed on 09.08.2010. These facts are suppressed by the Petitioner in the affidavit filed in support of the Writ Petition. The findings in O.S.No.01 of 2003 read thus: “ After perusing the documentary evidence and Grama Sabha resolution and other documents, the Court came to a conclusion that the Plaintiff never cultivated or having possession over the PS land and „D‟ patta was given to him by Revenue Authorities mistakenly and defendant cultivated the P.S. land since 1986 to till the appointment of receiver. Therefore, this Court came to a conclusion that the Defendant is actually in possession and enjoyment of the land, the Plaintiff never cultivated or in possession of the PS land at any time. Then the suit is dismissed without costs. The Mandal Revenue Officer, Rampachodavaram, directed to hand over the P.S land to the Defendant and take steps for cancellation of the „D‟ patta No.83 as per Rules. Each party bears their own costs”. 6. In the light of the above findings, the present Writ Petition is an abuse of the process of the Court. 7. Accordingly, the Writ Petition is dismissed. There shall be no order as to costs. 4 As a sequel, the miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending in this Petition shall stand closed. _______________________ JUSTICE NYAPATHY VIJAY Date: 24.02.2026 eha 5 THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE NYAPATHY VIJAY W.P.No.9239 of 2023 Dated: 24.02.2026 eha