Andhra Pradesh High Court
WP/31489/2024 of CHOWDAPPA Vs THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH on 31 December 2024
COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH :: AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) A TUESDAY, THE THIRTY FIRST DAY OF DECEMBEf^ TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FOUR PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE VENKATESWARLU NIMMAGADIM WRIT PETITION NO: 31489 OF 2024 O Between: Chowdappa, S/o Chikka Chowdappa, Aged about 36
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH :: AMARAVATI
(Special Original Jurisdiction)
A
TUESDAY, THE THIRTY FIRST DAY OF DECEMBEf^OTWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FOURPRESENTTHE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE VENKATESWARLU NIMMAGADIMWRIT PETITION NO: 31489 OF 2024
Between:
Chowdappa, S/o Chikka Chowdappa, Aged about 36 years, R/o DiguvaEchaloddi village, Madakasira mandal, Sri Satyasai[Dist.]
...PETITIONER
AND
1. The State of Andhra Pradesh, Rep. by its Principal Secretary, RevenueDepartment, Secretariat, Velagapudi, Amaravati, Guntur[District.]Department, Secretariat, Velagapudi, Amaravati, Guntur[District.]
2. The District Collector, Sri Satyasai, Sri Satyasai[District.]
3. The Revenue Divisional Officer, Madakasira, Sri Satyasai District.
4. The Tahsildar, Madakasira, Sri Satyasai District.
...RESPONDENTS
Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying that inthe circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court maybe pleased to issue a Writ, Order or Direction more particularly one in thenature of Writ of Mandamus, declaring the action of the respondent 4inforcibly trying to dispossess the petitioner and tryingto issue house sitepattas to third parties in petitioner land in Sy.No.76-1A/1[an][ extent][ of][ Ac.]1.34 cents out of total extent Ac. 1.56 cents situatedin Chatram village,Madakasira mandal, Sri Satyasai Dist. as illegal, arbitrary[and][ violation][ of]Article 300-Aof theConstitution of India and consequentlydirecttherespondent 4 not to interfere into the peaceful possession and enjoymentof the petitioners land.
lA NO: 1 OF 2024
Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the[circumstances]stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may bepleased to direct the respondents not to dispossess[the][ petitioner][ from][ the]land in Sy.No.76-1 A/1 an extent of Ac. 1.34 cents[out][ of][ total][ extent][ Ac.][ 1.5]6 cents situated in Chatram village, Madakasira mandal,[Sri] Satyasai[ Dist.,]pending disposal of this writ petition.
Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI M. KARIBASAIAHCounsel for the Respondent Nos.1 to 4: GP FOR REVENUE
The Court made the following: ORDER
APHC010604292024IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESHAT AMARAVATl[3329](Special Original Jurisdiction)
TUESDAY ,THE THIRTY FIRST DAY OF DECEMBERTWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FOUR
PRESENTTHE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE VENKATESWARLU NIMMAGADDA
WRIT PETITION NO: 31489/2024
Between:
Chowdappa
...PETITIONER
AND
The State Of Andhra Pradesh and Others
...RESPONDENT{S)
Counsel for the Petitioner:
1.M KARIBASAIAH
Counsel for the Respondent(S):
1.GPFOR REVENUE
THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE VENAKTESWARLU NIMMAGADDA
WRIT PETITION N0.31489 of 2024
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:
This writ petition is filed under Article 226 of the[Constitution][ of][ India][ by]
the Petitioner seeking the following relief; “to issue a writ, order or direction more particularly[one]in thenatureof WRIT OF MANDAMUS declaring the action of theRespondent No.4 in forcibly trying to dispossess the[petitioner]and trying to issue house site pattas to third parties[in][ petitioner]land in Sy.No.76-1A an extent of Ac.1.34 cents outof total extentAc.1.56 cents situated in Chatram Village, Madakasira[Mandal,]Sri Satyasai District as illegal, arbitrary and inviolation Article300-A of theConstitution of India and consequently direct theRespondent No.4 not to interfere into the peaceful[possession]and enjoyment of the petitioner’s land and pass....
2. During hearing, learned counsel for the petitioner,[without][ touching][ the]direction to the respondentsmerits of the case, requested this Court to issue ahis land, without following due process ofnot to dispossess the petitioner fromlaw.direction to the respondentsmerits of the case, requested this Court to issue ahis land, without following due process ofnot to dispossess the petitioner fromlaw.
3. Learned AssistantGovernment Pleader for Revenue, admitted that theofhislandandtherespondentspetitioneris continuingin possession authorities would follow due process of law and requested[to][ pass][ appropriate]orders.
4. The petitioner is absolute owner and possessor of[land][ in][ Sy.No.76-]1A/1 an extent of Ac. 1.34 cents out of total extent[Ac.][ 1.56][ cents][ situated]inChatramVillage,MadakasiraMandal,SriSatyasaiDistrict,Originally,assigned patta was granted in favour of Petitioner’s[grand-father][ in][ the][ year]1972 and. The total land issued was Ac.3.12 cents.Petitioner’s grandfatherhad 2 sons one Chikka Chowdappai.e., the father of[the]Petitioner andNagaraju. The said land was partitioned an extent of[Ac.][ 1.56][ cents][ to][ each]son.After death of Petitioner’s father Petitioner’s mother[has][ given][ the][ said]partitioned land to the Petitioner as gift deed. Now[some][ of][ the][ villagers][ are]trying to construct houses in the Petitioner’s land[by][ stating]that the 4Respondent herein orally instructed them that they[will][ be][ issued][ house][ site]pattas in the petitioner’s land. Hence the Writ Petition.
ofthe5.When the petitionerisin settled possession and enjoymentproperty, the respondents are not entitled to interfere[with][ the][ possession][ and]enjoyment of the petitioner and such highhanded action[of][ the][ respondents]wouldamounttodeprivingthepetitioner’sviolatingconstitutionalrightguaranteed under Article 300-A of the Constitution[of][ India,][ besides][ violation]of Article 14 of the Constitution of India. Even assuming[for][ a][ moment][ that][ this]petitioner’s possession is illegal, still, the petitioner[is][ required][ to][ be][ afforded]anopportuni-ty. before taking appropriate action and[in][ view][ of][ the][ law declared]
by the Apex Court in “Rame Gowda (dead) by L.Rs. v. M.Varadappa Naidu(Dead) by L.Rs.\ when the petitioner is in settled possession and enjoymentof the property, he cannot be dispossessed, without following due process oflaw. Therefore, the respondents are directed not to dispossess the petitionerfrom his property, except by due process of law.
6. Withthe abovedirection,the writpetitionis disposedof,withtheconsent of both the counsel. No costs.consent of both the counsel. No costs.
The miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shall[also][ stand][ closed.]
1 2004(1) see 769
Sd/-SHAIK MOHD. RAFIASSISTANT REGISTRAR//TRUE COPY//<r.SECTION OFFICER
To,
1. The Principal Secretary, Revenue Department, State of AndhraPradesh, Secretariat, Velagapudi, Amaravati, Guntur[District.]2.The District Collector, Sri Satyasai, Sri Satyasai[District.]3.The Revenue Divisional Officer, Madakasira, Sri Satyasai[District.]4.The Tahsildar, Madakasira, Sri Satyasai District.5.One CC to Sri M. Karibasaiah, Advocate [OPUC]6.Two CCs to GP for Revenue, High Court of Andhra Pradesh. [OUT]7.Three CD Copies.ssb HIGH COURT
DATED:31/12/2024
ORDERWP.No.31489 of 2024
7 3^I 0 JAN 2C25VOCurrent Section ^.£^s patc DISPOSING OF THE W.P. WITHOUT COSTS