Andhra Pradesh High Court
WP/19951/2019 of Thamanara Sathi Babu, Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh, on 6 April 2026
HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3459] TUESDAY, THE SEVENTH DAY OF APRIL TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE SUMATHI JAGADAM WRIT PETITION NO: 19951/2019 Between: 1. THAMANARA SATHI BABU,, S/O KANTAMAIAH, AGED 46 YEARS, R/O 4-45,
APHC010415612019
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH
AT AMARAVATI
(Special Original Jurisdiction)
TUESDAY,THE SEVENTH DAY OF APRIL
TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE SUMATHI JAGADAM
WRIT PETITION NO: 19951/2019
Between:
1. THAMANARA SATHI BABU,, S/O KANTAMAIAH, AGED 46 YEARS, R/O 4-45, YENDAPALLE VILLAGE KOTAURATLA MANDAL, VISAKHAPATNAM. DISTRICT.
...PETITIONER
AND
1. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL
SECRETARY,
REVENUE
DEPARTMENT
,
VELAGAPUDI,
SECRETARIAT BUILDINGS, AMARAVATHI, GUNTUR DISTRICT.
2. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, VISAKHAPATNAM, VISAKHAPATNAM
DISTRICT.
3. THE
REVENUE
DIVISIONAL
OFFICER,
NARSIPATNAM,
VISAKHAPATNAM DISTRICT.
4. THE TAHSILDAR, KOTAURATLA 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 topleased to issue a writ or order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the 4th respondent Tahsildar in threatening to dispossess the petitioner by putting the board in premises of the petitioners patta land an extent of in an extent of an land in Sy.No.229-2 to an extent of Ac.0-20 cents situated Yendapalle Village of
Kotauratla Mandal, Visakhapatnam District without passing an resumption order as illegal, arbitrary, and unconstitutional and contrary to provisions of B.S.O-18 and consequently direct the respondents not to dispossess the petitioner in his patta land mentioned above without following due process of law, 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 not to dispossess the petitioner in his patta land an land in Sy.No.229 2 to an extent of Ac.0-20 cents situated Yendapalle Village of Kotauratla Mandal, Visakhapatnam District without following due process of law, pending disposal of the main Writ Petition Counsel for the Petitioner:
1. N RAVI PRASAD
Counsel for the Respondent(S):
1. GP FOR REVENUE (AP)
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 B. Surya Chandra, learned counsel representing Sri N. Ravi Prasad, learned counsel for the petitioner, and the learned Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue for the respondents.
2. The petitioner contends that the 4th respondent, Tahsildar, is threatening to dispossess the petitioner by erecting a board on the land measuring 0.20 acres in Sy.No.229-2, located at Yendapalle Village, Kotauratla Mandal, Visakhapatnam District.
3. The Learned Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue has filed written instructions from the 4th respondent, clearly stating that the petitioner was allotted approximately 0.20 acres of land in Survey No. 229/2, located in Yendapalle Village, Kotauratla Mandal, Visakhapatnam District. However, the petitioner has been occupying about 0.08 acres in Survey No. 31/4 at Yendapalle Village. Upon identifying this discrepancy, the revenue authorities instructed the petitioner to vacate the encroached land to facilitate the issuance of house sites to the homeless poor. The petitioner, instead of complying with these instructions, has filed the present writ petition, alleging that the revenue authorities have erected a caution board indicating that the land belongs to the Government.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the respondents have erected a board, as indicated above, in Sy.No.229-2. The petitioner therefore prays for removal of the said board from the land in Sy.No.229-2.
5. This Court notes that the written instructions of the 4th respondent explicitly state that the petitioner has occupied an extent of 0.08 acres in Sy.No.31/4 at Yendapalle Village, Kotauratla Mandal, Visakhapatnam District, which is classified as government land allotted to homeless and poor individuals. Accordingly, the 4th respondent is directed to verify whether a board has been erected in Sy.No.229-2 at Yendapalle Village, Kotauratla Mandal, Visakhapatnam District. If such a board is found to be erected in Sy.No.229-2, the same shall be removed by the 4th respondent. Regarding the encroachment of approximately 0.08 acres in Sy.No.31/4 at Yendapalle Village, Kotauratla Mandal, Visakhapatnam District, the respondents are permitted to follow due process of law to effect removal of the encroachments.
6. With the above observations, the present Writ Petition is disposed of.No order as to costs.
As a sequel, miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shall stand closed.
__________________________ JUSTICE SUMATHI JAGADAM
Date: 07.04.2026 KBN
THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE SUMATHI JAGADAM
WRIT PETITION NO: 19951/2019
Dated: 07.04.2026 KBN