APHC010408252019 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3333] TUESDAY, THE 1st DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2026 PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE V.SUJATHA WRIT PETITION NO: 19605/2019 Between: 1. MALLA SREENU,, S/O. APPA RAO, AGED ABOUT 45YEARS, R/O. KASPA JAGANNADHAPURAM (K.J.PURAM), MADUGULA MANDAL, VISAKHAPATNAM DISTRICT. ...PETITIONER AND 1. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, THROUGH PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE, SECRETARIAT BUILDINGS, VELAGAPUDI, AMARAVATHI, GUNTUR DISTRICT. 2. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, VISAKHAPATNAM DISTRICT AT VISAKHAPATNAM. 3. THE REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER, NARSIPATNAM, VISAKHAPATNAM DISTRICT. 4. THE TAHSILDAR, V. MADUGULA MANDAL, VISAKHAPATNAM DISTRICT. ...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 to to issue an appropriate Writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the respondents in attempting to dispossess the petitioner from the Agriculture land situated in 2 VS,J W.P.No.19605 of 2019 an extent of Ac. 1.15 cents in Sy. No. 366-1 of K.J. Puram, Madugula Mandal, Visakhapatnam District with an intention to allot the same to 3rd parties without issuing any notice, without conducting any enquiry and without passing any order as illegal, arbitrary, unconstitutional and against the principles of Natural Justice besides violation of Article 14, 21 and 300-A of Constitution of India and to consequently direct the respondents not to interfere with the petitioner possession and enjoyment of the above said property in any manner including dispossession and allotment of the same as house plots, in the interest of justice and to pass IA NO: 1 OF 2019 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 issue an interim direction against the respondents not to interfere with the petitioners' possession and enjoyment of the Agricultural Land situated in an extent of Ac. 1.15 cents in Sy. 1.15 cents in Sy. No. 366-1 of K.J. Puram, Madugula Mandal, Visakhapatnam District, including dispossession and allotting the same as house plots during the pendency of the writ petition and to 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 may be pleased to vacate the interim order dated 05/12/2019 in WP.No. 19605 of 2019 and dismiss the writ petition Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. K JYOTHI PRASAD Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. GP FOR REVENUE (AP) The Court made the following: 3 VS,J W.P.No.19605 of 2019 ORDER: This Writ Petition came to be filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, seeking the following prayer: “…to issue an appropriate Writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the respondents in attempting to dispossess the petitioner from the Agriculture land situated in an extent of Ac. 1.15 cents in Sy. No. 366-1 of K.J. Puram, Madugula Mandal, Visakhapatnam District with an intention to allot the same to 3rd parties without issuing any notice, without conducting any enquiry and without passing any order as illegal, arbitrary, unconstitutional and against the principles of Natural Justice besides violation of Article 14, 21 and 300-A of Constitution of India and to consequently direct the respondents not to interfere with the petitioner possession and enjoyment of the above said property in any manner including dispossession and allotment of the same as house plots, in the interest of justice and to pass…” 2. The petitioner claims to be the absolute owner and possessor of the land admeasuring Acs.1.15 cents situated in Sy.No.366-1, KJ Puram, Madugula mandal, Visakhapatnam district and that the same devolved upon him from his father who purchased the same by way of a registered sale deed bearing document No.500 of 1993, dated 08.04.1993. After the death of the petitioner’s father, the petitioner continued to be in peaceful possession and enjoyment of the subject property without any interruption. The revenue authorities, considering the 4 VS,J W.P.No.19605 of 2019 possession of the petitioner over the subject property, issued pattadar passbook and title deed in favour of the petitioner. 3. While the matter stood thus, at the behest of local political leaders, the respondent authorities are said to have entered the petitioner’s property on 30.11.2019 and threatened to dispossess the petitioner from the subject property without having any authority. Aggrieved by the said action, the present writ petition is filed. 4. When the writ petition came up for admission on 05.12.2019, this Court passed the following interim order: “…During pendency of this writ petition, respondents are directed to maintain status quo.” 5. The 4th respondent filed a detailed counter affidavit stating that the revenue authorities have visited subject property in discharge of their official duties and identified the available Government land for implementation of Government welfare schemes. It is further stated that no attempt has been made by respondent authorities to dispossess the petitioner unlawfully as alleged by him and that they would follow due process of law, if at all they would like to interfere with the petitioner’s property. 6. Heard Ms. V. Sowmya, learned counsel representing Sri. K. Jyothi Prasad, learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue. 5 VS,J W.P.No.19605 of 2019 7. Perused the entire material available on record. It can be seen from the counter affidavit filed by the 4th respondent that the respondent authorities never made an attempt to dispossess the petitioner from the subject property. However, during the course of hearing, learned Assistant Government Pleader submitted that the respondent authorities would follow the due process of law, if at all they would like to interfere with the possession of the petitioner over the subject land. 8. In view of the same, instead of going into the merits of the case, this writ petition is disposed of directing the respondent authorities not to interfere with the peaceful possession and enjoyment of the petitioner over the land admeasuring Acs.1.15 cents situated in Sy.No.366-1, KJ Puram, Madugula mandal, Visakhapatnam, without following due process of law. 9. Accordingly, this writ petition is disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs. Consequently, Miscellaneous Petitions, if any, pending in this Petition shall stand closed. _____________________ JUSTICE V.SUJATHA 01.09.2026 Gss