Andhra Pradesh High Court
WP/4966/2018 of K.Krishna Reddy Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh, on 10 February 2026
HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3459] WEDNESDAY, THE ELEVENTH DAY OF FEBRUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE SUMATHI JAGADAM WRIT PETITION NO: 4966/2018 Between: 1. K.KRISHNA REDDY, S/O K.RAMACHANDRA REDDY HINDU, AGED ABOUT
APHC010111292018
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH
AT AMARAVATI
(Special Original Jurisdiction)
WEDNESDAY,THE ELEVENTH DAY OF FEBRUARY
TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE SUMATHI JAGADAM
WRIT PETITION NO: 4966/2018
Between:
1. K.KRISHNA REDDY, S/O K.RAMACHANDRA REDDY HINDU, AGED
ABOUT
YEARS,
OCC.
AGRICULTURE
R/O
GUDYANAMPALLI VILLAGE, PENUMUR MANDAL CHITTOOR
DISTRICT.
2. K.MUNASWAMY REDDY, S/O K.RAMACHANDRA REDDY HINDU, AGED
ABOUT
YEARS,
OCC.
AGRICULTURE
R/O
GUDYANAMPALLI VILLAGE, PENUMUR MANDAL CHITTOOR
DISTRICT.
...PETITIONER(S)
AND
1. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP.BY ITS PRINCIPAL
SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE, SECRETARIAT
BUILDINGS, VELAGAPUDI THULLURU MANDAL, AMARAVATHI, GUNTUR DISTRICT.
2. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, CHITTOOR DISTRICT CHITTOOR.
3. THE REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER, CHITTOOR, CHITTOOR
DISTRICT
4. THE TAHSILDAR, PENUMUR MANDAL, CHITTOOR DISTRICT.
JS,J
W.P.No.4966 of 2018
5. P JAYARAMI REDDY, S/O P.CHENGAL REDDY, AGED ABOUT 65
YEARS, OCC. AGRICULTURE R/O GUDYANAMPALLI VILLAGE, PENUMUR 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 to issue a writ order or direction more particularly one in the nature of WRIT OF MANDAMUS, declaring action of the respondents 1 to 4 in trying to dispossess the petitioners from their lands in Sy.No.846, to an extent of Ac. 3-50 cents each situated at Guntipalli Village, Gudyanampalli Post, Penumur Mandal, Chittoor District as illegal, arbitrary violative of principles of natural justice and also violation of Articles, 14, 21 and 300A
of the Constitution of India and consequently direct the respondents not to interfere in any manner with the peaceful possession and enjoyment of the petitioners lands to an extent of Ac. 3-50 each situated in Sy.No.846, Guntipalli Village, Gudyanampalli Post, Penumur Mandal, Chittoor District and pass IA NO: 1 OF 2018
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 4th respondent not to interfere in any manner with the peaceful possession and enjoyment of the petitioners lands to an extent of Ac. 3-50 each situated in Sy.No.846, Guntipalli Village, Gudyanampalli Post, Penumur Mandal, Chittoor District pending disposal of the Writ Petition and pass IA NO: 1 OF 2026
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 grant leave to the Respondent No.4 in the Writ Petition No.4966
of 2018 to file counter affidavit in the above Writ petition and pass Counsel for the Petitioner(S):
JS,J
W.P.No.4966 of 2018
1. T BALAJI
Counsel for the Respondent(S):
1. GP FOR REVENUE (AP)
This Court made the following:
JS,J
W.P.No.4966 of 2018
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 learned counsel for the petitioners and learned Assistant Government Pleader appearing on behalf of the official respondents.
The 4th respondent filed a counter affidavit stating that since the petitioners are not in possession or enjoyment of any portion of the land in Sy.No.846 of Guntipalli Revenue Village, the question of the respondents interfering with the petitioners’ alleged peaceful possession and enjoyment or attempting to dispossess them, does not arise.
No reply affidavit is filed by the petitioners to the counter affidavit of the 4th respondent denying the aforesaid averments.
In view of the same, the Writ Petition fails and accordingly is dismissed. No order as to costs.
As a sequel, miscellaneous petitions, if any pending, shall stand closed.
_________________________ JUSTICE SUMATHI JAGADAM 11th February, 2026 cbs
JS,J W.P.No.4966 of 2018
THE HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE SUMATHI JAGADAM
WRIT PETITION No.4966 of 2018
11th February, 2026 cbs