APHC010243792018 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3459] FRIDAY,THE THIRTEENTH DAY OF FEBRUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE SUMATHI JAGADAM WRIT PETITION NO: 10697/2018 Between: 1. JAMANA KANTHA RAO,, JAMANA KANTHA RAO, S/O SIMHACHALAM, AGED ABOUT 57 YEARS, OCC- COOLIE, R/O G- 178, ALKAANDA COLONY, OPP- SBI TRAINING CENTRE, VIZIANAGARAM, ANDHRA PRADESH VIZIANAGARAM 2. PATHI LAKSHMI,, W/O SURESH, AGED ABOUT 34 YEARS, OCC- COOLIE, R/O 1-78, PYDI VEEDHI, RELLA VILLAGE, GUMMA LAKSHMIPURAM MANDAL, VIZIANAGARAM, ANDHRA PRADESH. 3. DUMPA SURYAKANTHAM,, W/O APPALASWAMY, AGED ABOUT 52 YEARS, OCC- COOLIE, R/O 8-57-107, ADARSHNAGAR, SANTAPET,CHITTIVALASA, BHEEMUNIPATNAM VISAKHAPATNAM, ANDHRA PRADESH. 4. SEERAPU KANAKARATNAM,, W/O SEERAPU APPANNA, AGED ABOUT 59 YEARS, OCC- COOLIE R/O 38-14/3/1, MARRIPALEM, VISAKHAPATNAM MARCIA' VISAKHAPATNAM, ANDHRA PRADESH ...PETITIONER(S) AND 1. ANDHRA PRADESH BHOODAN YAGNA BOARD, ANDHRA PRADESH BHOODAN YAGNA BOARD, REPRESENTED BY ITS SPECIAL AUTHORITY COMMISSIONER OF LAND REVENUE BUILDING, ABIDS, HYDERABAD HYDERABAD 2. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, VISAKHAPATNAM DISTRICT MAIN ROAD, KRISHNA NAGAR,MAHARANIPET, VISAKHAPATNAM, ANDHRA PRADESH. 3. THE REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER, VISAKHAPATNAM DIVISION, VISAKHAPATNAM DISTRICT JS,J W.P No.10697 of 2018 2 4. THE TAHSILDAR, CHINNIGADILI MANDAL, VISAKHAPATNAM DISTRICT 5. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, REVENUE DEPARTMENT, A.P.SECRETARIAT OFFICE, VELAGAPUDI, GUNTUR DISTRICT, ANDHRA PRADESH ...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 pass an order, direction or writ more particularly one in the nature of writ of mandamus declaring the high-handed and illegal action of the Respondents more particularly the Respondent Nos.1 to 4 in interfering with the peaceful possession and enjoyment of the Petitioners over their respective house sites i.e., Plot No.2316 admeasuring 60 sq.yds in Sy.No.132 (Petitioner No.1) Plot No.2295 admeasuring 60 sq.yds in Sy.No.132 (Petitioner No.2), Plot No.2322 admeasuring 60 sq.yds in Sy.No.132 (Petitioner No.3) and Plot No.2324 admeasuring 60 sq.yds in Sy.No.132 (Petitioner No.4), situated at Paradesipalem Village, Visakhapatnam Rural Mandal, visakhpatanam District thereby to dispossess them from it without and pass IA NO: 1 OF 2018 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 the Respondents not to interfere with the peaceful possession and enjoyment of the Petitioners over their respective House Picts i.e., Plot No.2316 admeasuring 60 sq.yds in Sy.No.132 (Petitioner No.1), Plot No.2295 admeasuring 60 sq.yds in Sy.No.132 (Petitioner No.2), Plot No.2322 admeasuring 60 sq.yds in Sy.No.132 (Petitioner No.3) and Plot No.2324 admeasuring 60 sq.yds in Sy.No.132 (Petitioner No.4), situated at Paradesipalem Village, Visakhapatnam Rural Mandal, Visakhpatanam District thereby to dispossess the Petitioners forcibly from it and pass Counsel for the Petitioner(S): 1. G RAJESHWAR REDDY Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. GP FOR REVENUE (AP) JS,J W.P No.10697 of 2018 3 The Court made the following Order: Heard learned counsel on both sides. 2. The learned counsel for the petitioners made submissions with reference to the averments made in the affidavits and the material filed along with the writ petitions. According to the petitioners they were assigned 60 square yards each by the Andhra Pradesh Bhoodan Yagna Board vide separate proceedings dated 21.04.2014. They claim that they are in possession of their respective house plots and while they were taking steps to construct houses, the authorities concerned started interfering with their possession and made attempts to dispossess them in a highhanded manner, without issuing any notice or following due procedure as contemplated under law. 3. Respondents filed a counter-affidavit stating that the Tahsildar concerned had categorically asserted that the petitioners are not in possession and enjoyment of the subject matter plots, In so far as, the lands in survey Nos.132, the same are in possession of the Government and covered by bushes and trees. Similar statement was also made in respect of the Survey Nos.66/1 and 66/2 to the effect that the same are in possession of the Government and covered with bushes and trees. That apart, it was specifically asserted that no layout was approved by any authority and the proceedings issued by the Andhra Pradesh Bhoodan Yagna Board were not implemented as multiple cases and litigations are pending in respect of the subject lands. A reference was also made to the earlier orders passed in W.P No.2870 of 2008 dated 09.08.2017, to a letter addressed to the Andhra Pradesh Bhoodan Yagna Board as also to the Chief Commissioner of Land Administration by the District Collector, Visakhapatnam. 4. In this regard, the learned Assistant Government Pleader submits that as per the instructions received by him, Andhra Pradesh Bhoodan Yagna Board was abolished and therefore, no further action is taken. Be that as it may. JS,J W.P No.10697 of 2018 4 5. As seen from the material on record, except the proceedings stated to have been issued by the Andhra Pradesh Bhoodan Yagna Board allotting plots to the petitioners, no material is placed which would prima facie indicate that they are in possession of the subject matter plots. Further, no reply- affidavit was filed to the specific assertions made in the counter-affidavits of the Tahsildar which amounts to admission of the same and it is fatal to the case of the petitioners. Therefore, in the said circumstances, the reliefs prayed by the petitioners cannot be granted. 6. However, in the counter-affidavits it is mentioned that the Government of Andhra Pradesh has evolved a policy to provide housing to the poor under “Housing for All” scheme to the residents of Visakhapatnam city. A comprehensive survey was conducted by Greater Vishapatnam Municipal Corporation and APTIDCO was formed for the purpose of executing the housing scheme. It is also asserted that if the petitioners are eligible, their names will be considered under “Housing for All” scheme. 7. In the light of the above statement on oath, this Court deems it appropriate to dispose of the writ petition, leaving it open to the petitioners to approach the concerned Tahsildar for allotment of houses under the said scheme. If the petitioners make any applications pursuant to the orders of this Court, the same shall be examined and allotment of houses shall be made, subject to their eligibility. 8. With the above directions, Writ Petition is disposed of. No costs. Miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shall stand closed. __________________________________ JUSTICE SUMATHI JAGADAM Date:13.02.2026 rsd JS,J W.P No.10697 of 2018 5 135 THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE SUMATHI JAGADAM WRIT PETITION NO: 10697/2018 Date:13.02.2026 rsd