Jakkula Ramanamma 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 a writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of writ of Mandamus to declare the action of the respondents more particularly 4th respondent in interfering with the petitioner's land extent

¶17

<y

¶18

Ac.1.84cts in Sy.No.443/1 of Rangasamudram village, Porumamilla mandal, YSR Kadapa District without following due process of law as arbitrary, illegal, highhanded and also violative of Articles 14, 21 and 300-A of the Constitution of India lA NO: 1 OF 2025 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 with the petitioner s land extent Ac.1.84cts in Sy.No.443/1 of Rangasamudram village, Porumamilla mandal, YSR Kadapa District without following due process of law pending disposal of the Writ Petition

¶19

Counsel for the Petitioner(s) : SRI B SARVOTHAM REDDY

¶20

Counsel for the Respondents : GP FOR REVENUE (R1 TO R4)

¶21

The Court made the following ORDER :

¶22

APHC010046392025

¶23

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATl (Special Original Jurisdiction)

¶24

[3329]

¶25

THURSDAY ,THE THIRD DAY OF APRIL TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE

¶26

PRESENT

¶27

THE honourable SRI JUSTICE VENKATESWARUU NIMMAGADDA

¶28

\A/RIT PFTITIQN NO: 2342/2025

Between:

...PETITIONER

Jakkula Ramanamma

AND

The State Of Andhra Pradesh and Others

¶34

...RESPONDENT(S)

¶35

Counsel for the Petitioner:

¶36

1.B SARVOTHAM REDDY

¶37

Counsel for the Respondent(S):

¶38

1.GP FOR REVENUE

¶39

The Court made the following:

¶40

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE VENKATESWARLU NIMMAGADDA

¶41

WRIT PETITION NO:2342/2025

¶42

ORDER:

¶43

This writ petition is filed under Article 226 of the^{ConstitutionofIndiato} issue a Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the respondent authorities, more particularly, 4^'^ respondent herein in interfering with the petitioner’s land admeasuring to an extent of Ac.1.84 cents in Sy.No.443/1 situated at Rangasamudram Village, Porumamilla Mandal, YSR Kadapa District without following due process of law as illegal and arbitrary.

¶44

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Government Pleader for the respondents.

¶45

During hearing, learned counsel for the petitioner, without touching the merits of the case, requested this Court to issue a direction to the respondents not to interfere with the petitioner’s property without following due process of law. He further submits that this Court vide order dated 30.01.2025 directed all the parties concerned to maintain status quo and^{thesameisstillinforce.}

¶46

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.

¶47

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^{Courtin“RameGowda}

¶48

(dead) 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 interfere with the peaceful possession and enjoyment of the subject property of the petitioner, except by due process^oflaw. 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.

¶49

Consequently, miscellaneous petitions pending, if any,^{shallalsostand}

¶50

closed.

¶51