APHC010253312019 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: 11400/2019 Between: 1. GUNTURI PRABHUDAS, S/O DEVAIAH, AGED 40 YEARS, RESIDENT OF MAMIDIPALEM, ONGOLE, PRAKASAM DISTRICT. ...PETITIONER AND 1. STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, REVENUE DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT, VELAGAPUDI, AMARAVATHI, GUNTUR DISTRICT. 2. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, PRAKASAM DISTRICT AT ONGOLE 3. THE REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER, ONGOLE PRAKASAM DISTRICT. 4. THE TAHSILDAR, ONGOLE MANDAL, PRAKASAM 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 respondents particularly the 4th respondent in attempting to dispossess from the petitioner's land situated in an extent of Ac.0.38 cents covered by S.No.196/1 and an extent of Ac.1.66 cents covered by Sy.No.196/3 of Pelluru village, 2 VS,J W.P.No.11400 of 2019 Ongole Mandal, Prakasam District, highhandedly and to allot the same as house sites to third parties ignoring the petitioner's right, title and possession over the subject property which is evident from the revenue records as illegal, arbitrary, irrational, without jurisdiction, violation of principles of natural justice, offends Articles 14, 21 and 300-A of Constitution of India and to consequently direct the respondents not to interfere with his possession and enjoyment over the said land in any manner including his dispossession and allotting the same as house sites to third parties, 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 direct the respondents particularly the 4fil respondent not to interfere with the petitioner's possession and enjoyment over the land situated in an extent of Ac.0.38 cents covered by S.No.196/1 and an extent of Ac.1.66 cents covered by Sy.No.196/3 of Pelluru village, Ongole Mandal, Prakasam District, in any manner including his dispossession and allotting the same as house sites to third parties, in the interest of justice, pending disposal of the main Writ Petition and to pass Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. MEDIKONDA KONDALA RAO Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. GP FOR REVENUE (AP) The Court made the following: 3 VS,J W.P.No.11400 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 respondents particularly the 4th respondent in attempting to dispossess from the petitioner's land situated in an extent of Ac.0.38 cents covered by S.No.196/1 and an extent of Ac.1.66 cents covered by Sy.No.196/3 of Pelluru village, Ongole Mandal, Prakasam District, highhandedly and to allot the same as house sites to third parties ignoring the petitioner's right, title and possession over the subject property which is evident from the revenue records as illegal, arbitrary, irrational, without jurisdiction, violation of principles of natural justice, offends Articles 14, 21 and 300-A of Constitution of India and to consequently direct the respondents not to interfere with his possession and enjoyment over the said land in any manner including his dispossession and allotting the same as house sites to third parties, in the interest of justice and to pass…” 2. The petitioner claims to be the absolute owner and possessor of the agriculture land admeasuring Acs.0.38 cents situated in Sy.No.196/1 and another extent of land admeasuring Acs.1.66 cents situated in Sy.No.196/3 of Pelluru village, Ongole Mandal, Prakasam District, which in fact was originally in the possession and enjoyment of the petitioner‟s late father. After the death of his father in the year 2010, 4 VS,J W.P.No.11400 of 2019 the subject property devolved upon the petitioner and ever since, he has been in continuous possession and enjoyment of the same. Considering the long possession of the petitioner over the subject land, the revenue authorities have mutated petitioner‟s name in the revenue records and pattadar passbooks, title deeds were also issued in his favour. 3. While the matter stood thus, the respondent authorities tried to interfere with the peaceful possession and enjoyment of the petitioner over the subject property without following due process of law. Aggrieved by the same, the present writ petition is filed. 4. When the writ petition came up for admission on 16.08.2019, this Court passed the following interim order: “Till then, status quo obtaining as on today with regard to possession of the petitioner over the subject land shall be maintained by both parties.” 5. In spite of several adjournments, the respondents have not chosen to file counter affidavit. However, today, when the writ petition came up for hearing, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue furnished a copy of instructions of the 4th respondent bearing Rc.No.A/279/2026, dated 23.03.2026wherein it is stated that upon verification of the ground reality and official revenue records, it is found that the land admeasuring Acs.2.30 cents situated in Sy.No.196 is classified as Assessed Waste as per the FLR of Pelluru village and that 5 VS,J W.P.No.11400 of 2019 as per 10(1) Adangal, Sayyed Akbar S/o Meera Sahem is the pattadar for the entire land admeasuring Acs.2.30 cents under patta No.1464. It is further stated that the said entry is specifically mentioned as „Pitrajitam‟ (Ancestral Property), which also tallies with the 10(1) Adangal. Further, the name of one T. Naga Rajya Lakshmi was recorded for a small extent of land admeasuring Acs.0.30 cents under „Vikrayam‟ (sale) and that the petitioner‟s name is not recorded as pattadars. Though the petitioner produced pattadar passbook (PPB No.662), the corresponding khata number could not be traced in the official 1B register of Pelluru village. 6. It is further stated in the instructions that the revenue department has not issued any Darakhast (DK) pattas for the subject land in favour of the petitioner or his father and the same is substantiated by the detailed investigation based on the report of the Village Revenue Officer as per which, it was established that the pattadar passbooks produced by the petitioner is fabricated. 7. Though it is contended by the respondents in their instructions that the pattadar passbooks produced by the petitioner are fabricated, however, it can be observed that no action has been initiated as against such pattadar passbooks relied on by the petitioner. However, pursuant to the interim orders passed by this Court, the petitioner has been in possession and enjoyment of the subject property. In view of the same, 6 VS,J W.P.No.11400 of 2019 instead of going into merits of the case, this Court feels it appropriate to dispose of the writ petition by directing the respondent authorities not to interfere with the possession and enjoyment of the petitioner over the land admeasuring Acs.0.38 cents situated in Sy.No.196/1 and another extent of land admeasuring Acs.1.66 cents situated in Sy.No.196/3 of Pelluru village, Ongole Mandal, Prakasam District, if at all he is in possession, without following due process of law. 8. Accordingly, with the above direction, 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/GNP