Andhra Pradesh High Court
WP/22964/2018 of M. Ramakrishna Reddy Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh on 12 March 2026
HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3459] FRIDAY, THE THIRTEENTH DAY OF MARCH TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE SUMATHI JAGADAM WRIT PETITION NO: 22964/2018 Between: 1. M. RAMAKRISHNA REDDY, S/O. MUNI REDDY, AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS,
APHC010489942018
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH
AT AMARAVATI
(Special Original Jurisdiction)
FRIDAY, THE THIRTEENTH DAY OF MARCH
TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE SUMATHI JAGADAM
WRIT PETITION NO: 22964/2018
Between:
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.
1. M. RAMAKRISHNA REDDY, S/O. MUNI REDDY, AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS, OCC. AGRICULTURIST, R/O. KENCHANABALLA VILLAGE, RAMAKUPPAM MANDAL, CHITTOOR DISTRICT.
2. ANITHA, W/O. RAMAKRISHNA REDDY, AGED ABOUT 32 YEARS, OCC . AGRICULTURIST, R/O. KENCHANABALLA VILLAGE, RAMAKUPPAM MANDAL, CHITTOOR DISTRICT.
...PETITIONER(S) AND
1. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY,
REVENUE DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT BUILDINGS, VELAGAPUDI, AMARAVATHI, GUNTUR.
2. THE JOINT COLLECTOR/LAND ACQUISITION OFFICER, CHITTOOR, CHITTOOR DISTRICT.
3. THE REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER/SUBCOLLECTOR, MADANAPALLI, CHITTOOR DISTRICT.
4. THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, ROADS AND BUILDINGS, CHITTOOR, 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 toto issue a Writ, Order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus, declaring the action of the respondents 2 to 4 are trying to laying road from Ramakuppam to Vijalapuram village passing through the petitioners private property without following due process of law in respect of the petitioners lands in Sy.No.44/5C and extent of 0.99 cents situated at Bondalagunta Revenue Village, Ramapukuppam Mandal, Chittoor District and an extent of 0.70 cents and 3/8 and extent of 0.05 cents and Sy.No.81/8 and extent of 0.38 in of the 1st petitioner, in respect of the 2nd petitioner Sy.No.2-3 house property vide D.No.16-41 situated at Kanchanapalla Village, Ramakuppam Mandal, Chittoor District is illegal, arbitrary, violation of principles of natural justice and consequently direct the respondents not to interfere in peaceful possession and enjoyment of the petitioners lands in Sy.No.44/5C and extent of 0.99 cents situated at Bondalagunta Revenue Village, Ramapukuppam Mandal, Chittoor District and an extent of 0.70 cents and 3/8 and extent of 0.05 cents and Sy.No.81/8 and extent of 0.38 in of the 1st petitioner, in respect of the 2nd petitioner Sy.No.2-3 house property vide Door No. 16-41 situated at Kanchanapalla Village, Ramakuppam Mandal, Chittoor District and to pass direct the respondents 2 to 4 not to interfere in peaceful possession and enjoyment of the petitioners lands in respect of the petitioners lands in Sy.No.44/5C and extent of 0.99 cents situated at Bondalagunta Revenue Village, Ramapukuppam Mandal, Chittoor District and an extent of 0.70 cents and 3/8 and extent of 0.05 cents and Sy.No.81/8 and extent of 0.38 in of the 1st petitioner, in respect of the 2nd petitioner Sy.No.2-3 house property vide D.No.16-41 situated at Kanchanapalla Village, Ramakuppam Mandal, Chittoor District and to pass such other order or orders as this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper in the circumstances of the case and pass suspend the G.O.Rt.No.236 dated 20.04.2016 issued by the Government of Andhra Pradesh by violating the Right to fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013, pending disposal of the writ petition and to pass such other order or orders as this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper in the circumstances of the case and pass vacate the interim order passed in 1.A.No. 1 of 2018 in W.P.No. 22964 of 2018, dated. 12.07.2018, and pass Counsel for the Petitioner(S):
1. SATHEESH KUMAR EERLA Counsel for the Respondent(S):
1. GP FOR LAND ACQUISITION (AP)
2. GP FOR ROADS BUILDINGS (AP)
The Court made the following ORDER:
Sri Pilli Sundeep, learned counsel for Sri Satheesh Kumar Eerla, learned counsel for the petitioners and learned Assistant Government Pleader for Roads and Buildings appeared.
The learned Assistant Government Pleader for Roads and Buildings submitted that the respondent authorities are not interfering with the peaceful possession of petitioners’ private property.
If the respondents intend to acquire the petitioners’ land, they will follow due procedure prescribed under law.
Consequently, the Writ Petition stands disposed of based on the consent of both the parties, making the interim orders, dated 12.07.2018, absolute.
The respondent authorities are free to proceed in accordance with law. There shall be no order as to costs.
As a sequel, miscellaneous applications pending, if any, shall stand closed. __________________________________ JUSTICE SUMATHI JAGADAM Dated: 13.03.2026 KAS
THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE SUMATHI JAGADAM
WRIT PETITION NO: 22964/2018
Dated: 13.03.2026 KAS