APHC010282422026 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3521] THURSDAY,THE TWENTY FIRST DAY OF MAY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX PRESENT THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE Y. LAKSHMANA RAO WRIT PETITION NO: 14639/2026 Between: 1. METTA RAMBHATLU, S/O. LATE NARAYANA BHATLU, AGE 61 YEARS, OCC AGRICULTURE, R/O. D.NO. 2-27/A, CHINNA VEEDHI, THADIVALASA VILLAGE, PONDURU MANDAL, SRIKAKULAM DISTRICT. ...PETITIONER AND 1. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP., BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, REVENUE DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT BUILDINGS, VELAGAPUDI, AMARAVATHI,522237. 2. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, SRIKAKULAM, SRIKAKULAM DISTRICT, 532001. 3. THE REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER, SRIKAKULAM, SRIKAKULAM DISTRICT, 532001. 4. THE TAHSILDAR, PONDURU LYIANDAL, SRIKAKULAM DISTRICT, 532001. ...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 nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring action of the respondents No.2 to 4 in demolishing the shed situated in the land in an extent of Ac.0.03 cents situated in Sy.No. 111/5 in Tadivalasa village, Ponduru Mandal, Srikakulam 2 district without paying any compensation and without following due process of law is illegal, arbitrary and unconstitutional and the consequential action of the Respondents in trying to dispossess me without following the procedure contemplated under law as illegal, arbitrary, unconstitutional and violative of Article 300-A of the Constitution of India and consequently direct the Respondents not to interfere with my right and enjoyment over the land in an extent of Ac.0.03 cents situated in Sy.No.111/5 in Tadivalasa village, Ponduru Mandal, Srikakulam District and pay compensation for the removed structure without following due process of law 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 Respondents No,2 to 4 not to interfere with my rights and enjoyment over the land in respect of land admeasuring an extent of Ac.0.03 cents situated in Sy.No. 111/5 in Tadivalasa village, Ponduru Mandal, Srikakulam district, and pass Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. PAPUDIPPU SASHIDAR REDDY Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. GP FOR REVENUE The Court made the following: ORDER: The Writ Petition has been filed for the following relief: “…to issue an order, writ or direction, more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus, declaring action of the respondent Nos.2 to 4 in demolishing the shed situated in the land in an extent of Ac.0.03 cents situated in Sy.No.111/5 in Tadivalasa Village, Ponduru Mandal, Srikakulam District without paying any compensation and without following due process of law is illegal, arbitrary and unconstitutional and the consequential action of the Respondents in trying to dispossess me without following the procedure contemplated under law as illegal, arbitrary, unconstitutional and violative of Article 300-A of the Constitution of India and consequently direct the Respondents not to interfere with petitoner’s right and enjoyment over the land in an extent of Ac.0.03 cents situated in Sy.No.111/5 in Tadivalasa village, Ponduru Mandal, Srikakulam District 3 and pay compensation for the removed structure without following due process of law, and pass such other order or orders....” 2. Heard learned counsel for the Petitioner and learned Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue. 3. Sri. Papudippu Sashidhar Reddy, learned counsel for the Petitioner submits that the Respondents are trying to demolish the shed situated in the land to an extent of Ac.0.03 cents in Sy.No.111/5 of Tadivalasa Village, Ponduru Mandal, Srikakulam District, without paying either any compensation or following due process of law. 4. Sri T.Sanjeev Rao, learned Assistant Government Pleader on written instructions, submits that the subject land was classified as Government Land under Social Welfare Land Assignment and the Tahsildar has not involved in demolition of shed. 5. The Petitioner to buttress his contention that possession certificate was granted to him by the Mandal Revenue Officer/Revenue Divisional Officer, Srikakulam, he has filed the residence certificate dated 16.07.2012 purported to have been issued by the Mandal Revenue Officer, Ponduru Mandal. In the certificate dated 16.07.2012, it is mentioned that the Petitioner Metta Rambhatlu has been in possession of the subject land and right was confirmed in the investigation held on that date. It appears ex-facie that the Petitioner has been in possession of the property from 2012 onwards. If the land is classified as Government land, the Respondents are empowered to take appropriate measures in accordance with law. It appears that no notice was issued and no enquiry was conducted or no compensation was paid to 4 the Petitioner, but the Respondents have been trying to dispossess the Petitioner from the subject land without following due process of law. 6. Having regard to the entire facts and circumstances of the case and recording the submissions of the learned Assistant Government Pleader, the Writ Petition is disposed of, directing the Respondents not to demolish the said shed situated in the subject land and not to interfere with the peaceful possession and enjoyment of the petitioner over the subject land without following due process of law. There shall be no order as to costs. As a sequel, miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shall stand closed. ________________________ Dr.Y. LAKSHMANA RAO, J Date: 21.05.2026 TPS/BSP 5 14 THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE Y. LAKSHMANA RAO WRIT PETITION NO: 14639 of 2026 Date: 21.05.2026 TPS/BSP