Poola Sunanda Devi, Vs The State of Andhra… — Writ and Judicial Review | Andhra Pradesh HC (2025)

Poola Sunanda Devi, Vs The State of Andhra… — Writ and Judicial Review | Andhra Pradesh HC (2025)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

No substantive relief; the mandamus sought was not granted. The writ petition was closed at the admission stage without going into merits, with a direction that the respondents/Police follow due procedure established under law if they intend to call the petitioner to the Police Station in connection with any crime or enquiry; no order as to costs; pending interlocutory applications, if any, stand closed.

Issue for consideration

Whether the action of respondents 3 and 4, at the instance of respondents 5 and 7, in insisting that the petitioner appear before their authority and yield to their terms by handing over part of her 300 sq. yard house site property (D.No.6/363, Railway Kodur Village, Annamayya District) is illegal, irregular, irrational and without authority of law, violative of Articles 14 and 21, warranting mandamus and a direction not to interfere with her possession. +1 more

Ratio / Principle

The writ petition was closed at the stage of admission itself, without going into the merits of the case.

Key takeaways

The respondents/Police were directed to follow the due procedure established under law if they intend to call the petitioner to the Police Station in connection with any crime or enquiry.ratio¶31
The writ petition was closed with no order as to costs, and pending interlocutory applications, if any, were directed to stand closed.ratio¶32

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Writ Petition (Article 226) by Poola Sunanda Devi seeking mandamus against respondents 3 and 4, allegedly at the instance of respondents 5 and 7, for insisting that she appear before their authority and yield to their terms by handing over part of her 300 sq. yard house site property (D.No.6/363, Railway Kodur Village and Mandal, Annamayya District, erstwhile Cuddapah District), alleging violation of Articles 14 and 21. The Additional Government Pleader, on written instructions, submitted that per the police preliminary enquiry it is a civil dispute between the petitioner and unofficial respondents 5 to 7 which the police will not enter. The Court (B.V.L.N. Chakravarthi J.) closed the writ petition at the stage of admission itself without going into merits, directing the respondents/Police to follow due procedure established under law if they intend to call the petitioner to the Police Station in connection with any crime or enquiry. No order as to costs; pending interlocutory applications stood closed.

APHC010037692025

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI

(Special Original Jurisdiction)

[3368]

WEDNESDAY, THE FIFTH DAY OF FEBRUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE

PRESENT

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE B V L N CHAKRAVARTHI

WRIT PETITION NO: 2119/2025

Between:

Poola Sunanda Devi,

...PETITIONER

AND

The State Of Andhra Pradesh and Others

...RESPONDENT(S)

Counsel for the Petitioner:

NIMMAGADDA REVATHI

Counsel for the Respondent(S):

BALAJI MEDAMALLI

2.GP FOR HOME

The Court made the following order:

This Writ Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of

India is filed for the following relief:

“ to issue a writ order or direction more particularly one in the nature of the writ of MANDAMUS declaring the action of respondents particularly respondents 3 and 4 at the instance of respondents 5 and 7 in insisting her to appear before their authority and yield to the terms of respondents 5 and 7 by

2

handing over some portion of petitioners site property of 300 Sq Yards in D No 6/363 of Railway Kodur Village and Mandal Annamayya District Erstwhile Cuddapa District as illegal irregular and irrational and issued without any authority of law and violative of Articles 14 and 21 of Constitution of India and consequently direct the respondents particularly 4th respondent not to interfere in any manner with her possession over petitioner aforesaid house site property and pass such ...”

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Additional Government Pleader appearing for the State.

Learned Additional Government Pleader appearing for the State on written instructions would submit that as per the preliminary enquiry of the Police, it is a civil dispute between the petitioner and the unofficial respondent Nos.5 to 7 and they will not interfere with the civil dispute between the parties and all the other allegations made in the affidavit are not true and correct.

Submissions made by learned Assistant Government Pleader are placed on record.

In that view of the matter, this Court is of the considered opinion that the Writ Petition can be closed at the stage of admission itself, without going into merits of the case, by directing

3

the respondents/Police to follow due procedure established under law, if they intend to call the petitioners to the Police Station, in connection with any crime or enquiry.

Accordingly, Writ Petition is closed. No order as to costs.

Interlocutory applications, if any, pending shall stand

closed.

_______________________ ___ JUSTICE B.V.L.N. CHAKRAVARTHI

Dated: 05.02.2025 RMD/PSA

4

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE B.V.L.N. CHAKRAVARTHI

WRIT PETITION NO: 2119 of 2025

Date: 05.02.2025

RMD/PSA