Disposed¶52

Bellamkonda Bujjamma v. the State of Andhra Pradesh

Andhra Pradesh HC1 Dec 2025WP/1725/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Bellamkonda Bujjamma v. State of Andhra Pradesh; W.P.No.1725 of 2024; writ of mandamus; Article 226; Articles 14, 21 and 300-A; Tahsildar Dagadarthi Mandal; SPSR Nellore; Sy.No. 114/3B; Kothapalli Kowrugunta Village; Ac. 1.50 cents; pattadar passbook; provisional patta; adangals; status quo; W.P.No.30926 of 2016; W.V.M.P.No.4874 of 2016; W.A.No.561 of 2017; no counter filed; interim orders made absolute; liberty to follow due process of law; no costs.

What did the court decide?

Interim orders dated 25.01.2024 (status quo) made absolute; writ petition disposed of with liberty to the respondent authorities to follow due process of law; no costs. ¶52

Bellamkonda Bujjamma Vs the State of Andhra… — Writ and Judicial Review | Andhra Pradesh HC (2025)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Interim orders dated 25.01.2024 (status quo) made absolute; writ petition disposed of with liberty to the respondent authorities to follow due process of law; no costs.

¶52

Issue for consideration

Whether the action of the 4th respondent in insisting the petitioner to vacate the agricultural land admeasuring Ac. 1.50 Cents covered by survey No. 114/3B of Kothapalli Kowrugunta Village, Dagadarthi Mandal, SPSR Nellore District, without issuing any notice and without following any known procedure established by law, is highhanded, illegal, arbitrary and unconstitutional, violative of principles of natural justice and offensive of Articles 14, 21 and 300-A of the Constitution. +1 more

¶30

Court's answer

The writ petition is disposed of giving liberty to the respondent authorities to follow due process of law, with no order as to costs.

¶52

Ratio / Principle

Prima facie a point for consideration was made out that if the petitioner is dispossessed from the subject property without following law, it affects the rights of the petitioner; accordingly, an order of status quo was passed on 25.01.2024.

¶47

Key takeaways

The status quo directed in W.A.No.561 of 2017 was confined to Ac.3.55 cents in Sy.No.114-2, which has nothing to do with the subject property in the present writ petition.ratio¶46
As the respondents failed to file a counter even after lapse of nearly two years, the interim orders dated 25.01.2024 were made absolute.ratio¶51

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Andhra Pradesh High Court (Amaravati), D. Ramesh, J.: Writ petition under Article 226 by Bellamkonda Bujjamma seeking a writ of mandamus against the Tahsildar, Dagadarthi Mandal, who insisted she vacate agricultural land admeasuring Ac. 1.50 Cents in Sy.No. 114/3B of Kothapalli Kowrugunta Village, SPSR Nellore District, without notice or procedure established by law, allegedly offending Articles 14, 21 and 300-A. On 25.01.2024 the Court, noting pattadar passbook, provisional patta and adangals showing prima facie possession, and observing that the status quo ordered in W.A.No.561 of 2017 was confined to Ac.3.55 cents in Sy.No.114-2 (unrelated to the subject land), directed the respondents to file a counter and passed an interim status quo order. As no counter was filed even after nearly two years, the interim orders dated 25.01.2024 were made absolute and the writ petition was disposed of with liberty to the respondent authorities to follow due process of law. No costs.

¶1

DR,J W.P.No.1725 of 2024

¶2

APHC010029582024

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI

¶4

(Special Original Jurisdiction)

¶5

[3208]

¶6

TUESDAY,THE SECOND DAY OF DECEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE

¶7

PRESENT

¶8

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE D RAMESH

¶9

WRIT PETITION NO: 1725/2024

¶10

Between:

¶11

BELLAMKONDA BUJJAMMA, S/O. B. POLAIAH, AGED ABOUT 53 YEARS, OCC CULTIVATION, R/O. KOTHAPALLI KOWRUGUNTA VILLAGE AND POST, SUNNAPU BATTI, DAGADARTHI MANDAL, SPSR NELLORE DISTRICT.

¶12

...PETITIONER

¶13

AND

¶14

THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, REVENUE DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT, VELAGAPUDI, AMARAVATHI, GUNTUR DISTRICT.

¶15

DISTRICT COLLECTOR, SPSR NELLORE DISTRICT AT NELLORE.4

¶16

REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER, KAVALI, SPSR NELLORE DISTRICT.

¶17

TAHSILDAR, DAGADARTHI MANDAL, SPSR NELLORE DISTRICT.

¶18

...RESPONDENT(S):

¶19

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 tomay be pleased to issue a writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of WRIT OF MANDAMUS declaring the action of respondents, particularly the 4th respondent in insisting the petitioner to vacate from the agricultural landed property admeasuring with an extent of Ac. 1.50 Cents covered by survey No. 114/3B of Kothapalli Kowrugunta Village in Dagadarthi Mandal of SPSR Nellore District, without issuing any

¶20

DR,J

¶21

W.P.No.1725 of 2024

¶22

notice and without following any known procedure established by law, highhandedly, illegally, arbitrary and unconstitutional, violative of principles of natural justice and offends Articles 14, 21 and 300-A of Constitution of India and consequently direct the 4th respondent not to interfere with petitioner peaceful possession and enjoyment over the aforesaid agricultural landed property and pass such

¶23

Counsel for the Petitioner:

¶24

1.MUCHAKAYALA NARAYANA

¶25

Counsel for the Respondent(S):

¶26

1.GP FOR REVENUE

¶27

DR,J W.P.No.1725 of 2024

¶28

The Court made the following ORDER:

¶29

This Writ Petition, under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, is filed seeking the following relief:

¶30

“…..to issue a writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of WRIT OF MANDAMUS declaring the action of respondents, particularly the 4th respondent in insisting the petitioner to vacate from the agricultural landed property admeasuring with an extent of Ac. 1.50 Cents covered by survey No. 114/3B of Kothapalli Kowrugunta Village in Dagadarthi Mandal of SPSR Nellore District, without issuing any notice and without following any known procedure established by law, highhandedly, illegally, arbitrary and unconstitutional, violative of principles of natural justice and offends Articles 14, 21 and 300-A of Constitution of India and consequently direct the 4th respondent not to interfere with petitioner peaceful possession and enjoyment over the aforesaid agricultural landed property….”

¶31

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue appearing for respondents.

¶32

Considering the submissions and on perusal of the record, this Court on

¶33

25.01.2024 has directed the respondents to file a counter and passed an interim order which reads as below:

¶34

¶35

Heard

¶36

Sri Muchakayala Narayana, learned counsel for the petitioner, in elaboration contended that, the authorities are insisting the petitioner to vacate the agricultural land admeasuring to an extent of Ac.1.50 cents covered by Sy.No.114/3B of Kothapalli Kowrugunta Village in Dagadarthi Mandal of SPSR Nellore District, without issuing notice. Aggrieved of the

¶37

DR,J

¶38

W.P.No.1725 of 2024

¶39

same, the present writ petition is filed. In support of the contentions, the petitioner filed pattadar passbook and provisional patta and the adangals to show that the petitioner is in possession of the property. The said copies are placed on record and have drawn the attention of this Court to the same.

¶40

On the other hand, learned Assistant Government Pleader on written instructions dated 23.01.2024, contended that, some third parties filed a Writ Petition vide W.P.No.30926 of 2016, wherein this Court granted interim orders in which the subject property is also part of the schedule property in the said writ petition. Aggrieved by the granting of interim orders, the revenue authorities filed vacate stay application. As the same was vacated, the petitioner therein preferred a writ appeal vide W.A.No.561 of 2017 and the Division Bench of this Court disposed of the same granting an order of status quo. The said orders are placed on record and has drawn the attention of this Court to the same.

¶41

Perused the record.

¶42

The provisional patta, pattadar passbook and adangals prima facie goes to show that, the petitioner is in possession of the subject property. The order referred by the learned Assistant Government Pleader, W.A.No.561 of 2017 goes to show that, the Division Bench of this court disposed of the said writ appeal under its order dated 27.04.2017.

¶43

A perusal of the W.P.No.30926 of 2016 goes to show that, an interim order has been passed by the learned single judge of this composite High Court dated 19.09.2016 with regard to possession over the subject land. Wherein the revenue authorities filed a vacate stay application vide

¶44

DR,J

¶45

W.P.No.1725 of 2024

¶46

W.V.M.P.No.4874 of 2016 and the learned Single Judge vacated the earlier order of status quo for the entire extent of Ac.14.47 cents and restricted stay only to an extent of Ac.3.55 cents in Sy.No.114-2. Aggrieved thereby, the petitioner in the said writ petition preferred a writ appeal vide W.A.No.561 of 2017, wherein the Division Bench of the composite High Court disposed of the same directing both the parties to maintain status quo as on today in all aspects including possession, alienation and creation. Now, the petitioner in the present writ petition is claiming possession over the land in Sy.No.114/3 but in the writ appeal, this Court restricted the status quo to an extent of Ac.3.55 cents in Sy.No.114-2 which is nothing to do with the subject property in the present writ petition. However, a detailed counter is required to be invited for adjudicating the grievance of the petitioner in the present writ petition.

¶47

Prima facie a point for consideration has been made out by the petitioner, that in the meantime, if the petitioner is dispossessed from the subject without following law, it affects the rights of the petitioner. As such, to meet the ends of justice, this Court is inclined to pass the following interim order:

¶48

“There shall be an order of status quo to be maintained as on today, pending further orders.”

¶49