Date of reserved for orders : Date of pronouncement : 24.06.2026. Date of uploading : APHC010218422018 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3333] WEDNESDAY, THE 24th DAY OF JUNE 2026 PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE V.SUJATHA WRIT PETITION NO: 9536/2018 Between: 1. SHAIK MAHMOOD, AGED 54 YEARS, STREET VENDOR, D.NO.12- 17-5/2, SEETHARAMA NAGAR, GAJUWAKA, VISAKHAPATNAM. 2. SHAIK ABDUL KHADER, S/O.SHAIK AHMED, AGED 47 YEARS, STREET VENDOR, D.NO.38-34-20, MARRIPALEM, VISAKHAPATNAM. ...PETITIONER(S) AND 1. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, (LAND ACQUISITION DEPARTMENT), REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, SECRETARIAT, AMARAVATHI. 2. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, VISAKHAPATNAM DISTRICT. 3. THE LAND ACQUISITION DIVISIONAL OFFICER, VISAKHAPATNAM. 4. TAHSILDAR, PENDURTHI MANDAL, VISAKHAPATNAM CITY. ...RESPONDENT(S): 2 VS,J W.P.No.9536 of 2018 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 to to issue an order / direction or any appropriate writ more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the respondents in trying to acquire the residential plots of the petitioners i.e. Plot Nos.7 and 8 admeasuring 233.33 square yards and Plot Nos.15 and 28 admeasuring 433.33 square yards respectively situated in Sy.No.196/3 of China Mushidiwada (V), Pendurthi (M), Visakhapatnam District without initiating proceedings under the provisions of The right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013 or any other law as illegal, arbitrary, against the principles of natural justice and also violative of Article 300-A of the Constitution of India and consequently direct the respondents herein not to dispossess the petitioners from the above plots and to 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 herein not to dispossess the petitioners from their residential plots i.e. Plot No's:7 & 8 admeasuring 233.33 square yards and Plot No's:15 & 28 admeasuring 433.33 square yards respectively situated in Sy.No:196/3 of China Mushidiwada (V), Pendurthi (M), Visakhapatnam District pending disposal of the Writ Petition in the interest of justice. IA NO: 2 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 vacate the interim orders dated 22.03.2018 in I.A.No.1/2018 in N1/4- P.No.9536/2018, and to pass Counsel for the Petitioner(S): 1. SS RAMA KRISHNA PRASAD Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. GP FOR LAND ACQUISITION (AP) 3 VS,J W.P.No.9536 of 2018 The Court made the following: ORDER: This Writ Petition came to be filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, seeking the following prayer: “to issue an order / direction or any appropriate writ more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the respondents in trying to acquire the residential plots of the petitioners i.e. Plot Nos.7 and 8 admeasuring 233.33 square yards and Plot Nos.15 and 28 admeasuring 433.33 square yards respectively situated in Sy.No.196/3 of China Mushidiwada (V), Pendurthi (M), Visakhapatnam District without initiating proceedings under the provisions of The right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013 or any other law as illegal, arbitrary, against the principles of natural justice and also violative of Article 300-A of the Constitution of India and consequently direct the respondents herein not to dispossess the petitioners from the above plots and to pass” 2. The petitioners herein are street vendors and the 1st petitioner has purchased a house plot bearing Nos.7 and 8 admeasuring 233.33 square yards in Sy.No.196/3 situated at China Mushidiwada village, Pendurthi mandal, Visakhapatnam by way of a registered sale deed dated 07.05.2010 vide document bearing No.1576/2010 on the file of Sub- Registrar, Pendurthi. The 2nd petitioner has also purchased a house plot bearing Nos.15 and 28 admeasuring 433.33 square yards in 4 VS,J W.P.No.9536 of 2018 Sy.Nos.196/3 situated at China Mushidiwada village, Pendurthi mandal, Visakhapatnam by way of a registered sale deed dated 20.05.2009 vide document bearing No.1214/2009 on the file of Sub-Registrar, Pendurthi. Ever since, the petitioners were in peaceful possession of their respective properties. 3. While the matter stood thus, the 4th respondent and his staff visited the petitioners’ property on 05.03.2018 and instructed them to vacate the same on the ground that the Government is proposing to utilize the said land for public purpose. Aggrieved by the said action of the respondent authorities, the present writ petition is filed. 4. When the writ petition came up for admission on 22.03.2018, this Court has passed the following interim order: “There shall be status quo with regard to possession of the subject properties. However, this order will not preclude the respondents from proceeding in accordance with law.” 5. The 4th respondent filed a detailed counter affidavit denying the contention of the petitioners that they purchased the Government land, which was in fact originally assigned to one landless poor by name Sri. Saragadam Appala Naidu, in accordance with normal conditions of assignment as per which, the assigned land is heritable but not alienable. It is further stated that Section 3(1) of A.P. Assigned Lands (Prohibition of Transfer) Act, 1977, prohibits transfer of any land assigned to land losers, 5 VS,J W.P.No.9536 of 2018 poor persons by way of sale, gift, mortgage, exchange, lease etc. It is further stated that the petitioners are not in possession over the subject lands at any point of time. Hence requested to dismiss the writ petition. 6. Heard Sri. S.S. Rama Krishna, learned counsel for the petitioners and learned Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue. 7. Perused the entire material available on record. It can be observed from the record that the petitioners claim to be the possessors and enjoyers of the subject lands by relying on registered sale deeds executed in their favour. However, the counter affidavit discloses that the petitioners have purchased the subject lands from the original assignee contrary to the conditions of the said assignment. If the same is to be believed, it is for the respondents to issue a notice to the original assignees and as well as enjoyers i.e. the petitioner herein for violating the conditions of the assignment, which notice was not issued either on the original assignees or on the petitioners who are the enjoyers of the subject property, and it can also be observed that in pursuance of the interim orders passed by this Court, the petitioners are in possession of the subject property. In such a case, if the respondents believe that the petitioners are in possession of the subject lands contrary to the conditions of the original assignment, they are always at liberty to initiate 6 VS,J W.P.No.9536 of 2018 appropriate action as per Section 3(1) of the A.P. Assigned Lands (Prohibition of Transfer) Act,1977. 8. In view of the same, the writ petition is disposed of by directing the respondent authorities not to interfere with the possession of the petitioners over the subject properties without following due process of law, if at all the petitioners are in possession as on today. There shall be no order as to costs. Consequently, Miscellaneous Petitions, if any, pending in this Petition shall stand closed. _____________________ JUSTICE V.SUJATHA 24.06.2026 Gss Whether the order is : Speaking Yes/No / Recorded Yes/No Reportable Yes/No / Non-Reportable Yes/No