Uppala Jayaramaiah, Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh

of the Constitution of India praying that in Petition under Article 226 affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may the circumstances stated in the order, writ or direction more particularly one in the be pleased to issue an declaring the order passed by the 2nd nature of a Writ of Mandamus NO.A3/E-583684/2024 dated 06-02-2025 holding respondent herein in Re that the determination of the petitioner as^{landlesspoorpersonintheorder} of Endowments, Nellore in passed by the Assistant Commissioner D.Dis.No.3033/2006, dated 20-02-2007 declaring the^{petitioneraslandless} the Statutory Tenant and the and entitled to continue as poor person

¶19

further action of the 3^^ respondent in holding Public Auction of the lease hold rights in respect of Ac.0.98 cents of wet land comprised in Old Sy. No 36 and New Survey No 38 of Gamallapalem Village, H/o. Bodduvaaripalem Revenue Village, Kodavalur Mandal, SPSR Nellore District on 10-03-2025 contrary to the statutory Rules as illegal, arbitrary, without jurisdiction and unjust, and consequently setaside the order passed by the 2nd respondent dated 06-02-2025 and direct the respondents^{tocontinuethe} petitioner as the Statutory Tenant in respect of the above extent of the land of the 3^^^ respondent Muth.

¶20

^

¶21

lA NO: 1 OF 2025

¶22

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 suspend the operation of the order of the 2'’"' respondent in Re. No. A3/E- 583684/2024 dated 06-02-2025 and continue the petitioner as the Statutory Tenant in respect of Ac. 1.00 of wet land in old Sy.No.36 and New Survey No 38 of Gamallapalem Village, H/o. Bodduvaaiipalem Revenue Village, Kodavalur Mandal, SPSR Nellore District pending disposal of the above writ petition. lA NO: 2 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 stay all further proceedings pursuant to the public auction conducted by the 3'"' respondent on 10-03-2025 in respect^ofthelease hold rights in Ac. 1.00 of wet land in old Sy.No.36 and New Survey No 38 of Gamallapalem Village, H/o. Bodduvaaripalem Revenue Village, Kodavalur Mandal, SPSR Nellore District including dispossession^ofthe petitioner from the above extent of land pending disposal of the above writ petition.

¶23

Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI P.SRIDHAR REDDY

¶24

%

¶25

Counsel for the Respondents 1 & 2: GP FOR ENDOWMENTS Counsel for the Respondent No.3: SRI NAGARAJU NAGURU

¶26

Counsel for the Respondent No.4:

¶27

The Court made the following order:

¶28

APHC010136102025

¶29

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

¶30

[3458]

¶31

FRIDAY, THE TWENTY FIRST DAY OF MARCH TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE

¶32

PRESENT

¶33

THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE KIRANMAYEE MANDAVA

¶34

WRIT PETITION NO: 7019/2025

Between:

Uppala Jayaramaiah,

...Petitioner

AND

The State Of Andhra Pradesh and Others

¶40

...Respondents

¶41

Counsel for the Petitioner:

¶42

1.P Sridhar Reddy

¶43

Counsel for the Respondents:

¶44

I.Nagaraju Naguru

¶45

2.GP for Endowments

¶46

The Court made the following order:

¶47

Challenging the proceedings of the 2"''^ respondent^{dated06.02.2025} cancelling the proceedings dated 20.02.2007 recognizing^{thepetitioneras} landless poor person by the Assistant Commissioner of Endowments, Nellore and entitled to continue as the statutory tenant and^{furtheractionofthe3} rd respondent in holding Public Auction of the lease hold^rights in respect of Ac.0.98 cents of wet land comprised in Old Sy.No.36^{andNewSy.No.38of}

¶48

Gamallapalem Village, H/o. Bodduvaripalem Revenue Village, Kodavalur Mandal, SPSR Nellore District on 10.03.2025 contrary^{tothestatutoryRules.}

¶49

Heard Sri P.Sridhar Reddy, learned counsel for the^{petitioner,learned} Assistant Government Pleader for Endowments appearing for respondent Hos.1 and 2 and Sri Nagaraju Naguru, learned counsel^{forrespondentNo.3.}

¶50

It is contended that the impugned order was passed^{withoutissuing} notice. Earlier, a notice was issued on 07.10.2024,^enhancingthe rent to Rs.1,06,200/- from 2010-2011 to 2023-2024, alleging^{thatthepetitionerhad} not paid makta on par with the neighboring lands in^{thevicinityofthesubject} mutt.

¶51

Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner contended^thattherewas never any demand from the authorities to pay on par with the^neighboring lands of the locality.

¶52

This Court is of the considered view that the show-cause^noticewas issued, directing the petitioner to show cause as to^{whyanappropriateorder} should not be passed for not remitting the lease rentals^{ofRs.1,06,200/-from} 2010-11 to 2023-2024. However, the impugned order is^{passed,cancelling} the LLP issued in the year 2007, and the Executive^{Officerwasdirectedto} grant leases of subject lands in public auction.

¶53

Having regard to the contentions advanced, prima^{faciethisCourtfinds} that the impugned order was passed without issuing any notice to the

¶54

petitioner. The impugned order is accordingly set aside, and the petitioner is of Rs.1,75,000/- to the 2"'* respondent within a period of directed to pay a sum four weeks from the date of receipt of this order.

¶55