Andhra Pradesh High Court
WP/32499/2025 of AARE SUBBAMMA Vs THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH on 4 May 2026
HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3458] TUESDAY, THE FIFTH DAY OF MAY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE KIRANMAYEE MANDAVA WRIT PETITION NO: 32499/2025 Between: 1. AARE SUBBAMMA, W/O. LATE SUDHAKAR, AGED 58 YEARS. OCC
APHC010628802025
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH
AT AMARAVATI
(Special Original Jurisdiction)
TUESDAY,THE FIFTH DAY OF MAY
TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE KIRANMAYEE MANDAVA
WRIT PETITION NO: 32499/2025
Between:
1. AARE SUBBAMMA, W/O. LATE SUDHAKAR, AGED 58 YEARS. OCC
CULTIVATION, R/O. KATTARIPALLE VILLAGE, RAJAMPET MANDAL, ANNAMAIAH DISTRICT.
...PETITIONER
AND
1. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP. BY ITS , PRINCIPAL
SECRETARY
REVENUE
DEPARTMENT,
SECRETARIAT,
VELAGAPUDI, AMARAVATI, GUNTUR DISTRICT.
2. THE
DISTRICT
COLLECTOR,
ANNAMAIAH
DISTRICT
AT
RAYACHOTI.
3. THE REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER, RAJAMPET REVENUE
DIVISION, RAJAMPET. ANNAMAIAH DISTRICT
4. THE TAHSILDAR, RAJAMPET MANDAL, ANNAMAIAH DISTRICT.
5. KAMINENI VENKATA SATHISH, S/O KRISHNAIAH, AGE 40 YEARS
OCC-
CULTIVATION,
R/O
VARADAIAHGARI
PALLE
VILLAGE,
RAJAMPET MANDAL, ANNAMAIAH DISTRICT.
6. PALETI NAGARJUNA, S/O SUBBARAYUDU, AGE 42 YEARS OCC- CULTIVATION, R/O VARADAIAHGARI PALLE VILLAGE, RAJAMPET
MANDAL, ANNAMAIAH DISTRICT.
7. K C S NAIDU, S/O NARYANA, AGE45 YEARS OCC CULTIVATION, R/O VARADAIAHGARI PALLE VILLAGE, RAJAMPET MANDAL, ANNAMAIAH DISTRICT.
8. S PALETI RAMANAIAH, S/O PEDDA VENKATA SUBBAIAH AGE 38
YEATS OCC- CULTIVATION, R/O VARADAIAHGARI PALLE VILLAGE,
RAJAMPET MANDAL, ANNAMAIAH 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, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of WRIT OF MANDAMUS declaring the action of respondents more particularly the action of the 4th respondent at the behest of the unofficial respondents insisting the petitioner to vacate from her agricultural landed properties admeasuring Ac.4.10 Cents in Survey no. 1574 situated at Rajampet Revenue Village of Rajampet Mandal in Annamaiah District, without following any known procedure established by law, as illegal, irregular, irrational, violative of principles of natural justice and offends Articles 14, 21
and 300-A of Constitution of India and consequently direct the respondents not to interfere with petitioner peaceful possession and enjoyment over the subject land to an extent of Ac.4.10 Cents in Survey no. 1574 situated at Rajampet Revenue Village of Rajampet Mandal in Annamaiah District, and pass IA NO: 1 OF 2025
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 not to interfere with petitioner peaceful possession and enjoyment over their agricultural landed properties admeasuring Ac.4.10 Cents in Survey no. 1574 situated at Rajampet Revenue Village of Rajampet Mandal in Annamaiah District, nor insist them to vacate therefrom, pending disposal of the main Writ Petition and pass Counsel for the Petitioner:
1. NAVULURU KRISHNA SAI
Counsel for the Respondent(S):
1. GP FOR REVENUE
The Court made the following:
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
ORDER:-
Heard Sri Navuluru Krishna Sai, learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue appearing for the respondent Nos.1 to 4.
2. The grievance of the petitioner in the instant writ petition is against the action of the respondent Nos.2 to 4 in interfering with the peaceful possession and enjoyment of the petitioner over the subject property of an extent of Ac.4.10 cents in Sy.No.1574 situated at Rajampet Revenue Village of Rajampet Mandal in Annamaiah District, without following the due process of law.
3. It is contended that the petitioner’s husband was granted DKT Patta in the year 1984 over an extent of Ac.4.10 cents in Sy.No.1574 situated at Rajampet Revenue Village of Rajampet Mandal in Annamaiah District. After his demise, the petitioner has succeeded to the said property by way of inheritance. In recognition of her possession and enjoyment of the subject property, the 4th respondent has issued Pattadar Passbook and Title Deeds in favour of the petitioner by duly following the procedure under the provisions of the Andhra Pradesh Rights in Land and Pattadar Passbooks Act, 1971.
4. However, the 4th respondent and his staff at the behest of the unofficial respondents were trying to dispossess the petitioner from the subject land in order to assign the same in favour of the unofficial respondents. The petitioner sought the particulars of the assignment made in favour of the petitioner’s husband under RTI. In reply, the information sought by the petitioner was furnished by the office of the Tahsildar vide endorsement dated 14.07.2021 furnishing the details of the DKT patta in respect of the subject land as are available in their revenue records. A perusal of the same would reflect that the petitioner’s husband was granted assignment in respect of the subject land. In the said regard, the petitioner contends that the respondents without following the due process of law, cannot dispossess the petitioner from the subject property in order to assign the same in favour of the unofficial respondents.
5. Despite service of notice, no appearance is entered on behalf of the unofficial respondents.
6. It is not disputed that the petitioner is the wife of the original assignee. The petitioner, being wife of the original assignee is in continuous possession and enjoyment of the subject property. Therefore, she shall not be dispossessed from the subject property without following due process of law.
7. Having regard to the contentions advanced, this Court deems it appropriate to dispose of the writ petition, directing the respondents that the petitioner shall not be dispossessed from the subject property without following due process of law.
8. In view of the foregoing, the writ petition is disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs.
As a sequel, miscellaneous applications pending, if any, shall also stand closed.
______________________________ JUSTICE KIRANMAYEE MANDAVA Dated: 05.05.2026 ANI
THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE KIRANMAYEE MANDAVA
WRIT PETITION NO:32499 of 2025
Dated: 05.05.2026
ANI