Kvnsds Prakasarao @ Kone Prasad Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh

KVNSDS Prakasarao @ Kone Prasad S/o. KonePerraju, aged about 68 years, Occ: Retd. Employee, R/o. 16-218, Rajula colony, Venkatasainilayam, Jangareddygudem, Eluru District,AP-534447.

¶10

Kone Venkata Naga Suri Babu S/o. KoneSriramamurthy aged about 64 years, Occ: Employee, R/o. 2-826/A, Vivekananda colony. Near Rytu bazar,Mehdipatnam, Hyderabad, Telangana-500028.

¶11

Kone Sitaravamma Aged about 81 years, Occ: Retd. Employee, R/o.l4-l-31,Ramadevi Hospital Road, Near Aswaraopeta road Jangareddygudem, Eluru District.AP-534447.

¶12

Akula Srinivas Rao S/o. AkulaSuryanarayana, Aged about 55 years, Occ:Business, H.No :21-186, Munagalla Vari Street, Jangareddigudem village and mandal, Eluru District, AP-534447.

¶13

Gandamsetty Chandrasekar S / o. Akula Tatabbay, Aged about 44 years, Occ:Employee, Ghantyada, VTC Ghantyada, Vijayanagaram District, AP-535215.

¶14

t

¶15

Gullapudi Chalamayya S/o. Gullapudi Achuta Rao,

¶16

Aged about 53 years, Occ: Business, H.No.8-3-9, Aswai'aopeta road, main road, Jangareddigudem village & mandal, Eluru District, AP-534447.

¶17

Patti Kasi Viswanatham C/o, Pattikasi Vishwanatham, Aged about 57 years, Occ: Business, H.No; 14-1-16, Old seethahospital, Jangareddigudem village & Mandal, Eluru District, A P- 534447.

¶18

SatyanarayanaPanchayatula S/o. Jaggarao Panchayatula, Aged about 75 years, Occ: Retd. Employee, SVHS PRMS Residency, Lake view Colony, Pragathinagar, Qutubullapur, Nizampet, Rangareddy district, TG- 500090.

¶19

Akkipeddi Bhanumathi,

¶20

W/o. Akkipeddi Rama Suryanarayana, Aged about 61 years, Occ: House wife, H.No. 12-14-19/32, Society Road, Sajjapuram, Tanuku, Tanuku, West Godavari, AP-534211.

¶21

Seethala Eshwararao,

¶22

S/o. Subba Rao (Late),

¶23

Aged about 60 years, Occ: Pvt. Employee, Mutta towers, plot no.9, Aryavysya Kalyanamandapam road, Jangareddygudem village 85 Mandal, Eluru District, AP- 534447.

¶24

Marisetty Venkateshwara Rao, S/o. Koteswara Rao, Aged about 60 years, Occ: Agriculture, H.No. 14-1-17, Munnagalla Vari Veedhi, Jangaredigudem village Mandal, Eluru District, AP-534447.

¶25

Kuchibotla Venkata Raama Satyanarayana

¶26

t

¶27

S/o. Kuchibatla Venkata Sastry, Aged about 51 years, Occ: Business, R/o.l4-l-29,Ramadevi hospital road, Jangareddygudem village & Mandal Eluru District, AP-534447.

¶28

Bollu Nagendra Umainaheswari W/o. Mallikarjuna Rao, Aged about 56 years, Occ; house wife, R/o.23, second cross street, Thandhaiperiyarnagar, VTC, Etapitamchevady, Pondicherry district, Pondicherry state-605005.

¶29

Kothapalli Venkateswara Rao, C/o. Kothapalli Subramanyam Aged about 78 years, OcciRtd. Employee, H.No.7-56, Back side street of east ramalayam Temple, VTC.Taduvai PO, Taduvai,

¶30

Jangareddigudem village &mandalam, Eluru District, AP-534455.

¶31

Tuta Nagamani W/o. Thota Ramarao, Aged about76 years, Occ: house wife, H.No.26-155,

¶32

Ballavaari street, Cherukuwada, Penugondamandalam,

¶33

West Godavari district, AP-534320.

¶34

16. Pattapu Lakshmayya

¶35

S/o. Pattapu Seetharamudu, Aged about 55 years,

¶36

Occ: Govt.employee, Vedanthapuram, Koyyalagudem Mandal, Eluru District, AP- 534312.

¶37

Koppula Jhansirani

¶38

W/o.Koppula Satyanarayana, Aged about 68 years,

¶39

Occ: house wife, H.No: 12-2-73,

¶40

Uppalametta, Jangareddygudem village & Mandal, Eluru District, AP - 534447.

¶41

Marisetti Murali Madan S/o. Koteshwara Rao, Aged about 48 years, Occ: employee, D.no; 14-1-17, MunagallaVari Street, Jangareddygudem village & Mandal, Eluru District, AP-534447.

¶42

Mudda Kamala Florance W/o. Chalavad Prabhakararao, Aged about 74 years, Occ:house wife, H.no;14-1-50, Ramadevi Hospital Street, Jangareddigudem village dm Mandal, Eluru District, AP-534447.

¶43

Buddala Paparao S/o. Buddala Seetha Ramayya, Occ: agriculture, Ramadevi Hospital Street. Jangareddigudem village 6m Mandal, Eluru District, AP-534447.

¶44

Mohammad Moula C/o. Mohmmadlal sahib. Aged about 65 years Occ: Business, H.No. 17-16-577, Behind A V kalyanamandapam, Jangareddy Gudem village 6m mandal, Eluru District, AP-534447.

¶45

Bondada Satyanarayana Murthy, C/o. Bondada Subbarao, Aged about 63 years, Occ: Rtd. Employee, H.No:4-92 , Near Ramalayam, Madepalli village, Eluru District, AP- 534004.

¶46

Kandi Seethamahalakshmi W/o. Kandi Balakrishnareddy, Aged about 67 years, Occ:House wife, Ramadevi Hospital Street. Jangareddigudem village 6m Mandal, Eluru District, AP-534447.

¶47

Jujjuri Srinivasareddy
S/o. Gopireddy (Late),
Aged about 49 years,
Occ: Business, H.No; 14-126,
MunagalaVai-i Veedhi,
Jangareddigudem village 85 Mandal
EluruDistrict,AP- 534447.
...Petitioners
AND
1. The State of Andhra Pradesh,
Rep. by its Principal Secretary,
Endowment Department,
Secretariat, Velgapudi, Amaravathi,
Guntur, AP.
2. The Commissioner of Endowments,
Govt, of Andhra Pradesh, Vijayawada,
Krishna District, AP
3. The Executive Officer,
Sri Venugopalaswamyvari Temple,
Buttaigudem Road, Jangareddygudem,
Eluru District, A.P.
4. The District collector,
Eluru District, Eluru, A.P
5. The Mandal Revenue officer,
Jangareddygudem, Eluru District, AP
6. The Jangareddygudem Nagar Panchayat
Rep. by its Secretary, Jangareddygudem,
Eluru District, AP.
...Respondents

¶48

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 order direction more particularly one^{inthenatureofwrit} of Mandamus declare the action of the respondents seeking^{evictionofthe} petitioners from the land covered in survey no.398,399 RS.No.302 situated at Jangareddygudem Village and Mandal, Eluru District as illegal, arbitrary and violative of Article 300A of the constitution of India and against the principles of natural justice and consequentially direct the respondents not to evict the petitioners from their land covered in Survey No.398,399 RS.No.302 situated at Jangareddygudem Village and Mandal, Eluru District without following due process of law.

¶49

lA NO: 1 OF 2025

¶50

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 respondents not to interfere with the possession of the Petitioner No.1 to Petitioner No.24 including eviction of the petitioners from their respective properties pending disposal of the above writ petition.

¶51

Counsel for the Petitioners: SRI. N RAMACHENDRAIAH

¶52

Counsel for the Respondent Nos. 1&2: GP FOR ENDOWMENTS

¶53

Counsel for the Respondent No.3: M/s PADMAVATHI P SC FOR ENDOWMENTS

¶54

Counsel for the Respondent Nos. 4&5: GP FOR REVENUE

¶55

Counsel for the Respondent No. 6: M/S SIREESHA RANI VALLABHANENI SC FOR ZPP, MPP AND GP

¶56

The Court made the following order:

¶57

APHC010045932025

¶58

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

¶59

[3310]

¶60

TUESDAY ,THE EIGHTEENTH DAY OF FEBRUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE

¶61

PRESENT

¶62

THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE K MANMADHA RAO

¶63

WRIT PETITION NO: 2819/2025

¶64

Between:

¶65

Kvnsds Prakasarao @ Kone Prasad and Others ...PETITIONER{S) AND The State Of Andhra Pradesh and Others ...RESPONDENT(S)

¶66

Counsel for the Petitioner{S):

¶67

1.N RAMACHENDRAIAH Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1.GP FOR ENDOWMENTS

¶68

The Court made the following:

¶69

ORDER-

¶70

This petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution^{ofIndiaforthe}

¶71

following relief:-

¶72

. .pleased to issue order direction more particularly^onein the nature of writ of MANDAMUS declare the action of the respondents seeking eviction of the petitioners from the land covered in survey no. 398, 399 RS.No.302 situated^at Jangareddygudem Village and Mandal, Eluru District as illegal, arbitrary and violative of Article 300-A of the constitution of India and against the principles of^natural justice and consequentially direct the respondents^notto evict the petitioners from their land covered in Survey Nos. 398, 399 RS.No.302 situated at Jangareddy gudem Village and Mandal Eluru District without following due process of law and pass ”

¶73

2

¶74

The case of the petitioners in brief is that the petitioners^arethe legal heirs and absolute owners of various properties situated in Jangareddygudem Village and Mandal, Eluru District and have claimed ownership through registered sale deeds and inheritance. Their properties are covered by Survey Nos.398 and 399, which were assigned a new corresponding Survey No.302. However, due to an oversight in their sale deeds, the properties were incorrectly recorded under Survey Nos.303, 303/1, and 303/2 instead of Survey No.302. Despite being in continuous possession and paying property taxes, water charges, and obtaining electricity connections, they have faced challenges in rectifying^{thiserrorasauthorities} are not entertaining modifications or registrations.^{Theissuearosewhenthe} 3'’'^ respondent claimed ownership of land in Survey Nos.303, 303/1, and 303/2 and alleged that the petitioners had illegally encroached on temple property. A legal notice was also issued to the petitioners^on 19.10.2015 asserting that they had trespassed on temple land and^{raisedunauthorized} constructions. In response, the petitioners had also issued a detailed reply on 05.11.2015, denying these allegations and asserting that they are in possession of Survey No.302. Revenue records confirm that old Survey Nos.398 and 399 correspond to the new Survey No.302, while Survey No.303 is derived from old Survey No.402, which does not include the petitioners land.

¶75

Despite clear documentation establishing their ownership, the 3^'^ respondent published a notification in the Eenadu Telugu Daily on 16.12.2024,

¶76

3

¶77

proposing to register the properties under Section^{43oftheAndhraPradesh} Religious Institutions Endowments Act, 1987. The petitioners submitted objections to the said notification on 24.12.2024 through registered post. However, the 3'"^ respondent is allegedly attempting^{toforciblyevictthemfrom} their properties without following due process of law.^{Feelingaggrievedbythe} same, the present writ petition is filed.

¶78

Heard Mr. K.Venkateswarlu, learned counsel, representing Mr. N.Ramachendraiah, learned counsel for the petitioners and learned counsels appearing for the respondents.

¶79

On hearing, learned counsel for the petitioners submits^thatthe petitioners have submitted several representations in different dates to the respondents, but the same were pending. The respondents^haveissued a notification on 16.12.2024, stating that they are proposing to register the properties under Section 43 of the Andhra Pradesh Religious Institutions Endowments Act, 1987. The petitioners submitted objections to the said notification. He further submits that claim of the respondent No.3 in respect of the subject property is illegal and trying to evict^{thepetitionersfromthesubject} property as if the said property belong to them without^{anyfurtherenquiry.} Hence, the learned counsel for the petitioner requests^{topassappropriate} orders.

¶80

Learned Government Pleader for Endowments has produced a copy of the instructions of the respondent No.3-Executive^{Officer,wherein} it is

¶81

4

¶82

Stated that the subject land belongs to Sri Venugopalaswamy^Devasthanam and the objections were called for through paper advertisement dated 16.12.2024. The petitioners have submitted their objections claiming that the subject land belongs to them. However, the representations^{ofthepetitioners} are pending, they have not initiated any steps to evict^{thepetitioners} from^the scheduled lands. The matter is under consideration^{oftheDistrictEndowment} Officer, Eluru and there is no difficulty in the condition of the petitioners.

¶83

Considering the submissions of learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned counsels appearing for the respondents, the competent authority i.e. The District Endowment Officer is directed to take steps to dispose of the objections raised by the petitioners and pass appropriate reasoned orders, in accordance with law, within a period of three (03) months. from the date of receipt of copy of this order. Till then, the respondents are directed not to take any coercive steps against the petitioners.

¶84