Dismissed¶51

Y Suryanarayana v. the State of Andhra Pradesh

Andhra Pradesh HC24 Jul 2025WP/9162/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

WP No. 9162 of 2025, High Court of Andhra Pradesh at Amaravati, Subba Reddy Satti J., 25/07/2025. Y Suryanarayana v. State of Andhra Pradesh, District Collector Visakhapatnam, Tahasildar Bhimunipatnam Mandal, VRO Thallavalasa. Mandamus sought against interference with compound wall/fencing construction on assigned land Survey No. 190 (Ac. 0.80 cents) and private patta lands, Thallavalasa Village, Bhimunipatnam Mandal, Visakhapatnam; violation of Articles 14, 19(1)(g), 21, 300-A; IA No. 1 of 2025 under Section 151 CPC. Counsel for petitioner: Sreemannarayana Vattikuti; Respondents: GP for Revenue. Dismissed as withdrawn, no costs; pending miscellaneous petitions closed.

What did the court decide?

Permission to withdraw the writ petition; dismissed as withdrawn without costs; pending miscellaneous petitions stand closed. ¶51

Y Suryanarayana Vs the State of Andhra Pradesh — Writ and Judicial Review | Andhra Pradesh HC (2025)

I
V »

APHCQ10179622025

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

¶5

FRIDAY, THE TWENTY FIFTH DAY OF JULY p TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE %

¶6

¶7

PRESENT

¶8

THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE SUBBA REDDY SATTI

¶9

WRIT PETITION NO: 9162 OF 2025

¶10

Between:

¶11

Y Suryanarayana, s/o Vemalayya, Aged about 73 years, Occ; cultivation Thallavalasa Village, Bhimunipatnam Mandal, Visakhapatanam District. ...Petitioner

¶12

AND

¶13

The State of Andhra Pradesh, Rep by its Principal Secretary, Revenue Department, Secretariat Buildings, Velagapudi, Amaravati Guntur District.

¶14

The District Collector, Visakhapatnam District.

¶15

The Tahasildar, Bhimunipatnam Mandal, Visakhapatnam District.

¶16

The Village Revenue Officer, Thallavalasa village, Bhimunipatnam Mandal, Visakhapatnam District.

¶17

...Respondents

¶18

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 a Writ of Mandamus, Declaring the action of the respondent Nos 3 and 4 in illegally interfering with the petitioners lawful construction of a compound wall/fencing around his assigned iand in Survey No. 190 (Ac. 0.80 cents) and his adjacent private patta iands in Thailavaiasa Viiiage, Bhimunipatnam

¶19

Mandal, Visakhapatnam District, as arbitrary, unconstitutional,^{andviolativeof} Articles 14, 19(1)(g), 21 and 300-A of the Constitution of India and consequently direct the respondents to stop all interference and permit the petitioner to proceed with the construction of the compound wall/fencing for the protection of his mango trees and cattle shed. 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 respondent Nos 3 & 4 their subordinates or any person acting on their behalf from interfering in any manner with the petitioner's peaceful possession and enjoyment of his lands in Survey No. 190 (Ac. 0.80 cents) and his adjacent private patta lands in Thallavalasa Village, Bhimunipatnam Mandal, Visakhapatnam District, and the petitioner's construction of compound wall/fencing around his properties for protection of his mango trees and cattle shed. Pending disposal of the writ petition.

¶20

Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI SREEMANNARAYANA VATTIKUTI Counsel for the Respondents: GP FOR REVENUE

¶21

The Court made the following order:

[3331]

APHC010179622025

■

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

¶27

FRIDAY, THE TWENTY FIFTH DAY OF JULY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE

¶28

PRESENT

¶29

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE SUBBA REDDY SATT!

¶30

WRIT PETITION NO: 9162/2025

¶31

Between:

¶32

1.Y SURYANARAYANA, S/0 VEMALAYYA, AGED ABOUT 73 YEARS, OCC CULTIVATION, THALLAVALASA VILLAGE, BHIMUNIPATNAM MANDAL VISAKHAPATANAM DISTRICT.

¶33

...PETITIONER

¶34

AND

¶35

1 THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, REVENUE DEPARTMENT SECRETARIAT BUILDINGS, VELAGAPUDI, AMARAVATI, GUNTUR DISTRICT.

¶36

2.THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, VISAKHAPATNAM DISTRICT.

¶37

3.THE TAHASILDAR, BHIMUNIPATNAM MANDAL, VISAKHAPATNAM DISTRICT.

¶38

4.THE VILLAGE REVENUE OFFICER, THALLAVALASA VILLAGE, BHIMUNIPATNAM MANDAL, VISAKHAPATNAM DISTRICT.

¶39

...RESPONDENT(S):

¶40

« 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^{oneinthenature} of a Writ of Mandamus, Declaring the action of the^{respondentNos3and4in} illegally interfering with the petitioners lawful construction of a compound wall/fencing around his assigned land in Survey No.^190(Ac.0.80 cents) and his adjacent private patta lands in Thallavalasa Village, Bhimunipatnam Mandal, Visakhapatnam District, as arbitrary, unconstitutional,^{andviolativeof}

¶41

Page 2 of 2

¶42

Articles 14, 19(1)(g), 21 and 300-A of the Constitution of India and consequently direct the respondents to stop ail interference^andpermitthe petitioner to proceed with the construction of the^{compoundwall/fencingfor} the protection of his mango trees and cattle shed and^pass lA NO: 1 OF 2025 Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the^{circumstancesstated} in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to direct the respondent Nos 3 & 4 their subordinates^{oranypersonactingon} their behalf from interfering in any manner Vvith the petitioner's peaceful possession and enjoyment of his lands in Survey No.^{190(Ac.0.80cents)and} his adjacent private patta lands in Thallavalbsa Village, Bhimunipatnam Mandal, Visakhapatnam District, and the petitioner's construction of compound wall/fencing around his properties for protection of his mango trees and cattle shed. Pending disposal of the writ petition and pass

¶43

Counsel for the Petitioner:

¶44

I.SREEMANNAPAYANAVATTIKUTI

¶45

Counsel for the Respondent(S):

¶46

1.GP FOR REVENUE

¶47

The Court made the following:

¶48

ORDER