Disposed¶31

C Padma v. the State of Ap

Andhra Pradesh HC10 Mar 2025WP/6141/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Writ petition Article 226; threatened eviction without notice; due process of law; Articles 21 and 300-A; revenue authorities; Tahsildar possession certificate dated 28.03.2007; Sy.No.364/2 Cherivi Village Sathyavedu Mandal Tirupati District; Ac.0.10 cents; dispossession restraint direction; mandamus; natural justice; State of AP; disposed with direction, no costs.

What did the court decide?

Writ Petition disposed of with a direction to the respondents not to dispossess the petitioner from the subject property without following due process of law; no order as to costs; Miscellaneous Petitions, if any, pending in the writ petition stand closed. ¶31

C Padma Vs the State of Ap — Writ and Judicial Review | Andhra Pradesh HC (2025)

¶1

APHC010121842025

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI

¶3

(Special Original Jurisdiction)

¶4

[3329]

¶5

TUESDAY ,THE ELEVENTH DAY OF MARCH TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE

¶6

PRESENT

¶7

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE VENKATESWARLU NIMMAGADDA WRIT PETITION NO: 6141/2025

Between:

C Padma

...PETITIONER

AND

The State Of Ap and Others

¶13

...RESPONDENT(S)

¶14

Counsel for the Petitioner:

¶15

1.V VINOD K REDDY

¶16

Counsel for the Respondent(S):

¶17

1.GP FOR REVENUE

¶18

The Court made the following:

¶19

THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE VENKATESWARLU NIMMAGADDA

¶20

WRIT PETITION No.6141 OF 2025

¶21

ORDER:-

¶22

This writ petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of the India

¶23

seeking the following relief:-

¶24

“ to issue any writ or direction more particularly a writ in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of respondents in trying to dispossess the petitioner from the land admeasuring an extent of Ac.0.10Cents in Sy.No.364/2 of Cherivi Village,Sathyavedu Mandal,Tirupati District without issuing any notice, without following the due process of law as illegal, arbitrary,violative of Principles of Natural Justice Articles 21 and 300-A of the Constitution of India Consequently direct the respondents herein not to dispossess the petitioner from the land admeasuring an extent of Ac.0.10 Cents in Sy.No.364/2 of Cherivi Village,Sathyavedu Mandal,Tirupati District without following the due process of law and to pass such other order or orders...”

¶25

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Government

¶26

Pleader for Revenue for the respondents.

¶27

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner herein along with his family members are in peaceful possession and enjoyment of the land admeasuring to an extent of Ac.0.10 cents situated at Sy.No.364/2 of Cherivi Village, Sathyavedu Mandal, Tirupati District from past 20 years without there being any interference or hindrance from any quarter. For which, the then Tahsildar issued a certificate dated 28.03.2007 certifying that the petitioner has been in peaceful possession and enjoyment of the subject land. Later, the petitioner herein got constructed an asbestos roofed house and also obtained an electricity connection vide Service No.5331507000730. The

¶28

petitioner has been paying all the required charges/ taxes regularly without any default. While so, to the utter surprise of the petitioner, on 03.03.2025, respondent No.4 along with his staff visited and inspected the subject premises and threatened the petitioner to vacate the subject premises without issuing any notice or without following due procedure as contemplated under the law and without assigning any reasons for such eviction/ dispossession. Such action of the respondents in interfering with the peaceful possession and enjoyment of the subject property of the petitioner without following the due procedure as contemplated under law is highly illegal, arbitrary and contrary to law. Hence, the writ petition.

¶29

On the other hand, learned Government Pleader for Revenue appearing for the respondents submits that if the respondents intend to dispossess the petitioner from the subject property, the respondents would follow due process of law.

¶30

Having regard to the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Government Pleader for the respondents and on perusal of the material placed on record, this Court is of the considered opinion that the present Writ Petition can be disposed of, directing the respondents not to dispossess the petitioner from the subject property without following due process of law.

¶31