APHC010321082026 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3311] Wednesday, the 5th day of August, 2026 Present The Honourable Ms. Justice B. S. Bhanumathi Writ Petition No: 18747 of 2026 Between: Chennuri Srinivas and others ... Petitioners and The State of Andhra Pradesh and others ... Respondents Counsel for the petitioners: 1. Kolluru Satish Counsel for the respondents: The Court made the following: 1. G.P. for Revenue 2 BSB,J W.P.No.18747 of 2026 ORDER: The writ petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, to issue an appropriate writ, order or direction, more particularly one in the nature of writ of Mandamus, declaring the action of the respondent No. 4, the Tahsildar, Dwaraka Tirumala Mandal, in making efforts of dispossessing the petitioners from their subject property situated in Survey No. 29 / 2, admeasuring Ac. 0.25 cents, and additional extent of Ac. 0.05 cents situated at Dwaraka Tirumala Village and Mandal, Eluru District (formerly West Godavari District), by issuing notice vide R.C.No. 578 / 206 (B), dated 12.06.2026, without considering the petitioners’ explanation and without following due process of law thereby directly affecting and imperilling petitioners' long-standing and settled possession over the schedule property, without following due process of law as unjust, arbitrary, illegal and amounts to infringement of fundamental rights of the petitioners guaranteed under Article 21 of the Constitution of India, besides being in violation of the principles of natural justice; and consequently, direct the respondents, particularly the respondent No. 4, not to dispossess, evict or interfere with the peaceful possession and enjoyment of the petitioners over the schedule property in any manner, and further direct the respondents to stay all further proceedings pursuant to the notice, dated 12.06.2026, pending consideration and disposal of the representation / objections dated 16.06.2026, submitted by the petitioners and to pass such order as this Court deems fit just and proper. 2. The case of the petitioners, briefly stated, is as follows: a. The petitioners are possessors of the subject land. The father of the petitioners Nos. 1, 3 and 4, Sri Chennuri Subbanna, 3 BSB,J W.P.No.18747 of 2026 got 5 cents individualy in his name. It was allotted by the government long back considering the economic condition of the members of petitioners’ family. It is a part and parcel of the property enjoyed by the petitioners’ family. The petitioners have been using their property for residential and agricultural purposes by making necessary improvements and developments thereon. After the death of Chennuri Subbanna on 03.01.2023, the legal heirs are enjoying the property. b. The petitioners have electricity connection vide service No. 1514196002002977 sanctioned by A.P.S.E.B., in the name of Chennuri Subbanna. The petitioner No. 2 was granted patta for 5 cents, vide ROC No. 44 of 2008 (A), dated 25.04.2008. Though there is an error in the survey number of R.S. No. 11, it relates to the same property which is in possession of the petitioners. The remaining portions of the land were also recognized by the authorities for issuing enjoyment pattas of 5 cents each to the member of the family. The entire property of Ac. 0.25 cents has been in possession and enjoyment of the petitioners. They raised a compound wall around the same. Due to personal grudges, Sri Yandamuri Srinivas, working as a journalist has been continuously interfering with peaceful possession and enjoyment of the property, by misusing his influence due to his association with political leaders. The petitioners were compelled to lodge complaints with the S.H.O. Dwaraka Tirumala Police Station, D.G.P., D.I.G. and concerned S.P. seeking protection. c. Under such influence of the private individuals, a notice, vide ROC No. 578 of 206(B) dated 12.06.2026, was issued directing the petitioner to appear before the respondent No. 4 on 19.06.2026. As the petitioners were out of town to attend family 4 BSB,J W.P.No.18747 of 2026 function, a request was made to grant 15 days time to submit explanation along with supporting documents. Such a request was made verbally as well. Written request was sent through registered post to the office of the concerned Tahsildar. Despite the representation / explanation, dated 16.06.2026, the respondent authorities, more particularly the respondent No. 4, are passing oral threats to dispossess the petitioners to utter disrespect of the established principles of law. Hence, this writ petition was filed. 3. Sri G. Divyatheja, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue, submitted that he has not received written instructions. 4. Ms. K. Krishna Deepthi, learned counsel representing the learned counsel for the petitioners, appearing through video conference, submitted that the petitioners had submitted a fresh explanation yesterday also, but the same had not been received by the respondent authorities, but they are threatening to dispossess the petitioners. 5. The learned Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue represented that the petitioners enclosed the copies of two pattas said to have been issued in favour of Chennuri Subbanna and the petitioner No. 2, each for 5 cents, while claiming the petition schedule subject land of 25 cents, without the claim being supported by any kind of documents, even for the rest of 16 cents and therefore, the claim of the petitioner is ex facie illegal and incorrect. 6. In response thereto, learned counsel representing the petitioners submitted that the petitioners have presently copies of two pattas only and therefore, their interest to that extent needs to be protected. 5 BSB,J W.P.No.18747 of 2026 7. Upon consideration of the submissions on both sides and the documents filed along with the writ petition, this Court is of the view that the writ petition can be disposed of with appropriate directions. 8. As such, the writ petition is disposed of permitting the petitioners to submit explanation through registered post within one week from today, along with all necessary supporting documents and upon receipt of such explanation, the respondent No. 4 shall give the petitioners an opportunity of hearing within 10 days therefrom and pass appropriate order. Till such time, status quo shall be maintained with regard to the property covered by the copies of pattas in the name of Chennuri Subbanna and the petitioner No. 2. The respondent authorities are at liberty to proceed as per law in respect of the property which is not covered by any document of patta. Pending miscellaneous applications, if any, shall stand closed. ________________________ JUSTICE B.S. BHANUMATHI Dated: 05.08.2026 NSM 6 BSB,J W.P.No.18747 of 2026 34 The Honourable Ms. Justice B.S.Bhanumathi Writ Petition No: 18747 of 2026 Dated: 05.08.2026 NSM