APHC010377452019 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: 18163/2019 Between: 1. PERURU SUBRAHMANYAM, S/O LATE P.CHINNABBA, AGED ABOUT 56 YEARS, DRIVER IN TTD, R/O D.NO.4-30, HARIZANAWADA, PERURU VILLAGE, TIRUPATI RURAL MANDAL, CHITTOOR DISTRICT ...PETITIONER AND 1. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, CHITTOOR 2. THE SUBCOLLECTOR, TIRUPATI 3. THE TAHSILDHAR, TIRUPATI RURAL MANDAL, CHITTOOR 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 topleased to issue a writ in the nature of a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, direction, order or orders declaring the action of the respondent No. 3 herein in trying to dispossession of the petitioner from the lands in an extent of Ac.0-26 cents in Sy.No.538-B1 and an extent of Ac.0-24 cents in Sy.No.543-BII in patta No.302 total 0-50 cents only situated at Peruru village accounts, Tirupati Rural Mandal, Chittoor District which are in his exclusive peaceful possession and enjoyment of the same, having acquired 2 VS,J W.P.No.18163 of 2019 the same by way of inheritance without any prior notice as wholly illegal, arbitrary and without jurisdiction and void and violated the principles of natural justice and affected his rights guaranteed under article 14, 19(1)(g) and 300(A) of the Constitution of India and consequently, direct the respondents herein not to dispossession or interfere by way of any mode in the petitioner's exclusive peaceful possession and enjoyment of the lands in an extent of Ac.0-26 cents in Sy.No.538-B1 and an extent of Ac.0-24 cents in Sy.No.543- BII in patta No.302 total 0-50 cents situated at Peruru village accounts, Tirupati Rural Mandal, Chittoor District 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 pleased to direct the respondents herein not to interfere in the petitoner's exclusive peaceful possession and enjoyment of the lands in an extent of Ac.O-26 cents in Sy.No.538-B1 and an extent of Ac.0-24 cents in Sy.No.543- BII in patta No.302 total 0-50 cents only situated at Peruru village aceounts, Tirupati Rural Mandal, Chittoor District pending disposal of the writ petition Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. V ESWARAIAH CHOWDARY Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. GP FOR REVENUE (AP) The Court made the following: 3 VS,J W.P.No.18163 of 2019 ORDER: This Writ Petition came to be filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, seeking the following prayer: “…to issue a writ in the nature of a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, direction, order or orders declaring the action of the respondent No. 3 herein in trying to dispossession of the petitioner from the lands in an extent of Ac.0-26 cents in Sy.No.538-B1 and an extent of Ac.0-24 cents in Sy.No.543-BII in patta No.302 total 0-50 cents only situated at Peruru village accounts, Tirupati Rural Mandal, Chittoor District which are in his exclusive peaceful possession and enjoyment of the same, having acquired the same by way of inheritance without any prior notice as wholly illegal, arbitrary and without jurisdiction and void and violated the principles of natural justice and affected his rights guaranteed under article 14, 19(1)(g) and 300(A) of the Constitution of India and consequently, direct the respondents herein not to dispossession or interfere by way of any mode in the petitioner's exclusive peaceful possession and enjoyment of the lands in an extent of Ac.0-26 cents in Sy.No.538-B1 and an extent of Ac.0-24 cents in Sy.No.543-BII in patta No.302 total 0-50 cents situated at Peruru village accounts, Tirupati Rural Mandal, Chittoor District…” 2. The case of the petitioner is that originally, one Chinnabba (father of the petitioner) and Mangaiah, who are brothers, were granted assignment patta in the year 1955 vide DKT patta Nos.96/64 and 123/64 dated 24.06.1955 respectively, for the land admeasuring Acs.0.26 cents in Sy.No.538-B1 and Acs.0.24 cents in Sy.No.543-BII of 4 VS,J W.P.No.18163 of 2019 Peruru village, Tirupati rural mandal, Chittoor district. Subsequent to the death of the said Mangaiah, the name of the petitioner’s father was incorporated in the revenue records, as there is no other legal heir. During the lifetime of the petitioner’s father, he was in peaceful and continuous possession of the subject land without any interruption. 3. After the death of the petitioner’s father, the subject property devolved upon the petitioner and accordingly, the petitioner has been in peaceful possession and enjoyment of the subject property ever since. While the matter stood thus, the 3rd respondent tried to dispossess the petitioner from the subject land without following due process of law. Aggrieved by the said action, the present writ petition is filed. 4. The 3rd respondent filed a detailed counter affidavit admitting the fact that the land admeasuring Acs.0.26 cents situated in Sy.No.538/1B of Peruru village, Tirupati rural mandal, Chittoor district was assigned in favour of Chinnabba (petitioner’s father) vide DKT patta No.96/4/64, dated 26.01.1955 and the land admeasuring Acs.0.24 cents was assigned in favour of C. Mangaiah vide DKT patta No.123/4/64, dated 24.06.1955. However, as the said assignees alienated the said lands to third parties, which is in violation of conditions of D-form patta, the then Tahsildar cancelled such assignment vide proceedings bearing R.Dis.A/355/85, dated 20.02.1992 and reserved the same for house sites. 5 VS,J W.P.No.18163 of 2019 Subsequent to cancellation of assignments, the lands were vested with the Government and the same were also notified under Section 22A of the Registration Act, 1908 and thus, it cannot be contended that the petitioner and his father were in peaceful possession and enjoyment of the subject lands. It is further contended that the petitioner filed the present writ petition by producing bogus nefarious and non-existing documents in order to utilize the lands vested for public purpose. Hence, requested to dismiss the writ petition. 5. Heard Sri. Tarun Kumar Chowdary, learned counsel representing Sri. V. Eswaraiah Chowdary, learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue. 6. Perused the entire material available on record. It can be seen from the record that though the subject lands were assigned in favour of the petitioner’s father and maternal uncle, the said assignment is said to have been cancelled subsequently by the then Tahsildar vide proceedings dated 20.02.1992 on the ground that the assignees have alienated the said property in favour of third parties. It can also be seen that the subject properties were notified in the list of prohibited properties under Section 22A of the Registration Act, 1908. In such circumstances, the question of dispossessing the petitioners from the subject property would not arise and thus, the writ petition is liable to be dismissed. 6 VS,J W.P.No.18163 of 2019 7. In view of the above, this writ petition is dismissed. 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