Maramreddy Ramanamma Vs The state of Andhra Pradesh

¶1

APHC010002352020

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI

¶3

(Special Original Jurisdiction)

¶4

[3329]

¶5

MONDAY,THE EIGHTEENTH DAY OF AUGUST TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE

¶6

PRESENT

¶7

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE VENKATESWARLU NIMMAGADDA WRIT PETITION NO: 259/2020

¶8

Between:

¶9

MARAMREDDY RAMANAMMA, W/O CHINAMALAKONDAIAH AGED ABOUT 48 YEARAS, PEERAPURAM NARASIMHANAYUNI KANDRIKA VILLAGE, JARUGUMALLI MANDAL,PRAKASAM DISTRICT.

¶10

.MARAMAREDDY RAMANAMMA, W/O CHINA KONDAIAH, AGED 63 YEARS, PEERAPURAM NARASIMHANAYUNI KANDRIKA VILLAGE, JARUGUMALLI MANDAL,PRAKASAM DISTRICT.

¶11

YALLAULA SUBBAIAH, S/O PEDDANAGIREDDY AGED ABOUT 73 YEARS ,1-77D ,PEERAPURAM, NARSIMHANAYANI KANDRIKA VILLAGE, JARUGUMALLI MANDAL, PRAKASAM DISTRICT.

¶12

ANNEM RAVANAMMA, W/O CHINA KOTAIAH AGED ABOUT 61 YEARS, 4-28, KAMBALADINNE VILLAGE, PAMOORU MANDAL, PRAKASAM DISTRICT.

¶13

ALIKEPALLI MALLIKARJUNA REDDY, S/O CHINA KONDAIAAH AGED ABOUT 26 YEARS, PEERAPURAM ZARUMALLI MANDAAL PRAKASAM DISTRICT.

¶14

ALIKEPALLI MURALI KRISHNA, S/O MALAKONDAIAH AGED ABOUT 31 YEARS, PEERAPURAM NARASIMHANAYANI KANDRIKA VILLAGE, JARUGUMILLI MANDAL, PRAKASAM DISTRICT.

...PETITIONER(S)

2

AND

THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, ITS REP BY PRINCIPAL SECRATERY , PANCHYAT RAJ DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT, VELAGAPUDI AMARAVATHI.

¶19

THE DIVISIONAL ENIGINER, PANCHYAT RAJ DEPARTMENT, SINGARAYIKONDA, PRAKASAM DISTRICT.

¶20

THE ASSISTANT ENIGINER, PANCHYAT RAJ DEPARTMENT, SINGARAYIKONDA, PRAKASAM DISTRICT

¶21

THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, (PIU) P.R,ONGOLE DIVISION, SANTAPETA, ONGOLE, PRAKASAM DISTRICT

¶22

THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, PRAKADAM DISTRICT, ONGOLE

¶23

...RESPONDENT(S):

¶24

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 toto issue a Writ Order particularly in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the Respondents in trying to lay Road in the Land of the Petitioners Situatted in RS NO 5/1, 5/1,439, 430-431,6 and 6 respectively in Pirapurammamicialavarikhandrika Village, Jarugumalli Mandal, Prakasam District without following due process of law is illegal, illegal arbitrary and Violation of Principles of Natural Justice iind consequently direct the Respondents not to lay the Road in the Land of the Petitioners Situatted in RS NO 5/1, 5/1,439, 430-431,6 and 6 respectively in Pirapuram marr idalavarikhandrika Village, Jarugumalli Mandal, Prakasam District with out following due process of law and pass

¶25

IA NO: 1 OF 2020

¶26

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 pleased to direct the Respondents not to lay the Road in in the Land of the Petitioner Situatted in RS NO 5/1, 5/1,439, 430-431,6 and 6 respectively in Pirapurammamidalavarikhandrika Village, Jrigumalli Mandal, Prakasam District with out following due process of law pending disposal of the above writ petition and pas

¶27

3

¶28

Counsel for the Petitioner(S):

¶29

1.SURESH KUMAR POTTURI

¶30

Counsel for the Respondent(S):

¶31

1.GP FOR PANCHAYAT RAJ RURAL DEV (AP)

¶32

The Court made the following:

¶33

4

¶34

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE VENKATESWARLU NIMMAGADDA

¶35

WRIT PETITION NO:259/2020

¶36

ORDER:

¶37

The present writ petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of

¶38

India seeking following relief:

¶39

“to issue a Writ, Order particularly in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the Respondents in trying to lay Road in the Land of the Petitioners Situated in R.S.NO.5/1, 5/1, 439, 430-431, 6 and 6 respectively in Pirapuram mamidalavari khandrika Village, Jarugumalli Mandal, Prakasam District without following due process of law is illegal, arbitrary and Violation of Principles of Natural Justice and consequently direct the Respondents not to lay the Road in the Land of the Petitioners’ Situated in R.S.No. 5/1, 5/1, 439, 430-431, 6 and 6 respectively in Pirapuram mamidalavari khandrika Village, Jarugumalli Mandal, Prakasam District without following due process of law and pass such other order or orders…”

¶40

Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned Government Pleader for Panchayat Raj and Rural Development for the respondents.

¶41

Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioners herein are the pattadars and possessors of the agricultural lands in R.S.No.5/1, 5/1, 439, 430-431, 6 and 6 situated at Pirapuram mamidalavari Khandrika Village, Jarugumalli Mandal, Prakasam District. For which, the revenue authorities issued pattadar pass books and mutated their names in the revenue records

¶42

5

¶43

in respect of their respective lands. While things stood thus, the respondent authorities are trying to lay a road through the petitioners land without issuing any notice and without following due process of law. Hence, the writ petition.

¶44

Learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that at the time of admission, this Court vide order dated 23.01.2020 granted an interim order directing the respondents not to lay any road through the petitioners land as mentioned above.

¶45

On the other hand, learned Government Pleader for the respondents submits that pursuant to the orders of this Court dated 23.01.2020, the respondents did not lay any road through the petitioners land as alleged. He further submits that if at all they intend to lay any road through the petitioners’ land, they will follow due process of law.

¶46

Having regard to the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioners and learned Government Pleader for the respondents and in view of the orders dated 23.01.2020, this Court is of the considered view that the present writ petition can be disposed of, with a direction to the respondents, if at all the respondents intend to lay any road through the petitioners’ land as mentioned above, they shall adhere to the due process as contemplated under the law. Without observing the same, the respondents are directed not to interfere with the possession and enjoyment of the property of the petitioners’. There shall be no order as to costs.

¶47

6

¶48

Consequently, Miscellaneous Petitions, if any, pending in the writ

¶49

petition shall stand closed.

¶50

________________________________ VENKATESWARLU NIMMAGADDA, J

¶51

18.08.2025 BSP

¶52

7