Kurapati Nagabhushanam Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh

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 an appropriate writ, order or direction more particularly one in nature of WRIT OF MANDAMUS [ by declaring the action of the Respondents herein particularly Respondent Nos. 3 and 4 in illegally

¶23

¶24

tl

¶25

interfering and threatening to dispossess petitioner from the peaceful possession and enjoyment of the property in Sy.No 514/2,^{foranextentof} Ac.0.66 Cents of Amberpeta Village, Bhimadole Mandal,^{EluruDistrictwithout} “ issuing any notice following the due process of law^{asnothingbutillegal,} arbitrary, highhanded and violation of principles of natural Justice apart from violation of fundamental rights guaranteed under Articles 14, 19, 21 and 300A of The Constitution of India and consequently direct the respondents not to interfere with the petitioner property.

¶26

lA NO: 1 OF 2025

¶27

Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the^{circumstancesstated} in the affidavit filed in support Pfthe petition, the High Court may be pleased to direct 3'”'' and 4*^ respondent hof to interfere with the petitioner property in Sy.No 514/2 for an extent of Ac.0.66 Cents of Amberpeta Village, Bhimadole Mandal, Eluru District, pending disposal of the writ petition pending disposal of the above writ petition a

¶28

Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI VARDHINEEDI SAI KIRAN

¶29

Counsel for the Respondents: GP FOR REVENUE

¶30

The^ourt made the following:

■i-

C

s -•

APHC010299792025

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI

¶36

[3329]

¶37

(Special Original Jurisdiction)

¶38

FRIDAY ,THE TWENTIETH DAY OF JUNE TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE

¶39

PRESENT

¶40

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE VENKATESWARLU NIMMAGADDA

¶41

WRIT PETITION NO: 14847/2025

¶42

Between:

¶43

KurapatiNagabhushanam

¶44

...PETITIONER

¶45

AND

¶46

The State Of Andhra Pradesh and Others

¶47

...RESPONDENT(S)

¶48

Counsel for the Petitioner'

¶49

1.VARDHINEEDI SAI KIRAN

¶50

Counsel for the Respondent(S):

¶51

1.GP FOR REVENUE

¶52

The Court made the following:

¶53

X

¶54

DURABLE SRI JUSTICE VENKATESWARLU NIMMAGADDA WRIT PETITION NO: 14847/2025

¶55

ORDER:

¶56

This writ petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India to

¶57

issue a Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the respondents in trying to dispossess/ evict the petitioner from his property in Sy.No.514/2, for an extent of Ac.0.66 cents situated at Amberpeta Village, Bhimadole Mandal, Eluru District without issuing any notice or without following due process of law as || illegal, arbitrary; consequently, direct the respondents not to interfere with the peaceful possession and enjoyment of the subject property of the petitioner. 2. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Government Pleader for Revenue for the respondents.

¶58

During hearing, learned counsel for the petitioner, without touching the merits of the case, requested this Court to issue a direction to the respondent autt^orities not to interfere with the peaceful possession and enjoyment of the subject property of the petitioner without following due process of law.

¶59

4 Learned Government Pleader for Revenue submits that, if the- petitioner is in possession of the subject property, the respondents would follow due process of law and requested to pass appropriate orders.

¶60

When the petitioner is in settled possession and enjoyment of the property, the petitioner cannot be dispossessed, without following due process of law in view of the law declared by the Apex Court in “Rame Gowda (dead)

¶61

1 ” by L.Rs. V. M.Varadappa Naidu (Dead) by L.Rs. Therefore, if the petitioner is in possession of the subject property, the respondents are directed not to interfere with the peaceful possession and enjoyment of the subject property of the petitioner, except by due process of law. 6. With the above direction, the writ petition is disposed of at the stage of admission with the consent of both the counsel. No costs.

¶62

Consequently, miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shall also stand

¶63

closed.

¶64

2004 (1)SCC 769

¶65

Sd/- M SRINIVAS ASSISTANT REGISTRAR

¶66

//TRUE COPY//

¶67

SECTION OFFICER