Disposed¶51

G Mahesh v. the State of Andhra Pradesh

Andhra Pradesh HC26 Jan 2026WP/1907/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

AP High Court writ petition disposed (27.01.2026, B. Krishna Mohan J): petitioners' challenge to threatened dispossession from house sites in Sy.Nos.356-2 and 356-4, Gooty village/Mandal, Anantapuramu, without compensation under Right to Fair Compensation Act 2013 resolved on government's written instructions dated 27.01.2026 that dispossession is confined to Government land in Sy.No.356-3 for a Sewage Treatment Plant; no costs; IAs closed; no case law cited.

What did the court decide?

Writ petition disposed of on the basis of the written instructions of the 4th respondent dated 27.01.2026 recorded by the Court and made part of the record; no further orders necessary; no order as to costs; pending interlocutory applications closed. ¶51

G Mahesh Vs the State of Andhra Pradesh — Land Acquisition | Andhra Pradesh HC (2026)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶51

Issue for consideration

Whether the action of respondent Nos.4 and 5 in trying to dispossess petitioner Nos.1 to 8 from their house sites in Sy.No.356-2 and 356-4 of Gooty Village and Mandal, Anantapuramu District without paying compensation as per the Right to Fair Compensation Act, 2013 is illegal and arbitrary. +1 more

¶44

Court's answer

In view of the facts and circumstances and the specific written instructions of the 4th respondent dated 27.01.2026 (that the respondents are not dispossessing the petitioners from their allotted plots in Sy.Nos.356-2 and 356-4 and the proposal is confined to Sy.No.356-3, undisputed Government land, for a Sewage Treatment Plant), no further orders are necessary in the writ petition; the written instructions are made part of the Court record.

¶49

Ratio / Principle

The Writ Petition is disposed of, with no order as to costs.

¶51

Key takeaways

As a sequel to the disposal, pending interlocutory applications, if any, stand closed.ratio¶53

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Writ Petition under Article 226 (B. Krishna Mohan, J., High Court of Andhra Pradesh at Amaravati, 27.01.2026): Eight agriculturists/labourers of Muppalagutti and Khadarpet villages challenged the action of the Tahsildar, Gooty Mandal and the Gooty Municipal Corporation in attempting to dispossess them from house sites in Sy.Nos.356-2 and 356-4, Gooty village and Mandal, Anantapuramu District, without compensation under the Right to Fair Compensation Act, 2013, and sought interim protection (IA No.1 of 2026 under Section 151 CPC). The learned Assistant Government Pleader, on the written instructions of the 4th respondent dated 27.01.2026, stated that the respondents are not dispossessing the petitioners from their allotted plots in Sy.Nos.356-2 and 356-4; the proposal concerns only Sy.No.356-3, undisputed Government land, for construction of a Sewage Treatment Plant (STP) of vital public importance for sanitation and public health in Gooty Municipality, without affecting private interests in neighbouring survey numbers. Recording these instructions and making them part of the Court record, the Court held no further orders were necessary and disposed of the writ petition with no order as to costs, closing pending interlocutory applications. No precedent was cited or discussed.

¶1

[3233]

¶2

APHC010028382026

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI

¶4

(Special Original Jurisdiction)

¶5

TUESDAY,THE TWENTY SEVENTH DAY OF JANUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX

¶6

PRESENT

¶7

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE B KRISHNA MOHAN

¶8

WRIT PETITION NO: 1907/2026

¶9

Between:

¶10

G MAHESH, S/O G. PAKKIRAPPA, AGE 36 YEARS OCC AGRICULTURIST, IV WARD, BHIMUNIPALLI ROAD, MUPPALAGUTTI VILLAGE, PEDDAVADUGURU MANDAL ANANATAPURAMU DISTRICT-515405

¶11

VANGANURU. PAKKIRAPPA, S/O LATE PAKKIRAPPA, AGE 44 YEARS, OCC AGRICULTURIST, IV WARD, BHIMUNIPALLI ROAD, MUPPALAGUTTI VILLAGE, PEDDAVADUGURU MANDAL, ANANATAPURAMU DISTRICT-515405

¶12

G. LAKSHMI NARASIMHAIAH, S/O G. PAKKIRAPPA, AGE 42 YEARS OCC AGRICULTURIST, 1ST WARD, ANJANEYASWAMY TEMPLE STREET, MUPPALAGUTTI VILLAGE, PEDDAVADUGURU MANDAL, ANANATAPURAMUDISTRICT-515405

¶13

V. CHINNAPAKKIRAPPA, S/O LATE V. PAKKIRAPPA, AGE 42 YEARS OCC. AGRICULTURE LABOUR, IV WARD, BHIMUNIPALLI ROAD, MUPPALAGUTTI VILLAGE, PEDDAVADUGURU MANDAL, ANANATAPURAMU DISTRICT-515405

¶14

D. RAMANAIAH, S/O LATE D. OBULESU AGE 57 YEARS, OCC AGRICULTURAL LABOUR, 1ST WARD, KHADARPET VILLAGE, PAMIDI MANDAL, ANANATAPURAMU DISTRICT-515405

¶15

S. GANGARAJU, S/O LATE S. GANGANNA, AGE 79 YEARS, OCC. AGRICULTURIST, 11 WARD, MAREMMA STREET, MUPPALAGUTTI VILLAGE, PEDDAVADUGURU MANDAL, ANANATAPURAMU DISTRICT-515405

¶16

¶17

HBKM,J

¶18

W.P.No.1907 of 2026

¶19

DODDI VARALAKSHMI, W/O D. GANGANNA, AGED 42 YEARS OCC. LABOUR, II WARD, BHIMUNIPALLI ROAD, MUPPALAGUTTI VILLAGE, PEDDAVADUGURU MANDAL, ANANATAPURAMU DISTRICT-515405

¶20

V. YERRAMMA, W/O LATE PAKKIRAPPA, AGE 80 YEARS OCC. NIL IV WARD, BHIMUNIPALLI ROAD, MUPPALAGUTTI VILLAGE, PEDDAVADUGURU MANDAL, ANANATAPURAMU DISTRICT515405

¶21

...PETITIONER(S)

¶22

AND

¶23

THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REPRESENTED BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY (REVENUE), SECRETARIAT, VELAGAPUDI, GUNTUR DISTRICT-522237

¶24

THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, ANANATAPURAMU DISTRICT AT ANANATAPURAMU-515001

¶25

THE REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER, O/O REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER, GUNTAKAL, ANANATAPURAMU DISTRICT-515001

¶26

THE TAHSILDAR, GOOTY MANDAL, GOOTY, ANANATAPURAMU DISTRICT-515001

¶27

THE GOOTY MUNICIPAL CORPORATION, REP BY ITS COMMISSIONER, GOOTY, ANANTAPURAMU DISTRICT-515001 .

¶28

...RESPONDENT(S):

¶29

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 topleased to issue an Order or a Direction or a Writ more in the nature of Writ of Mandamus by declaring the action of the Respondents particularly 4 and 5 in trying to dispossess the Petitioners 1 to 8 from their house sites situated in Sy.No. 356-2 and 356-4 of Gooty Village and Mandal, Anantapuramu District without paying compensation as per the Right to Fair Compensation Act 2013 is as illegal, arbitrary, autocratic, and against to the principles of natural justice and consequently direct the Respondents herein not to dispossess the Petitioners from the above mentioned house sites of the petitioners admeasuring extents of house sites as per the sale deeds got

¶30

¶31

HBKM,J

¶32

W.P.No.1907 of 2026

¶33

registered in favour of each petitioners covered under Survey No.356-2 and 356-4 situated at Gooty village and Mandal, Anantapuramu District in the interests of justice and pass

¶34

IA NO: 1 OF 2026

¶35

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 particularly respondent Nos 4 and 5 not to dispossess the Petitioners from their house sites admeasuring with respective extents as mentioned in their respective sale deeds situated in Survey No.356-2 and 356-4 situated at Gooty village and Mandal Anantapuramu District pending disposal of the main Writ Petition and pass

¶36

Counsel for the Petitioner(S):

¶37

1.K SREEDHAR MURTHY

¶38

Counsel for the Respondent(S):

¶39

1.GP FOR REVENUE

¶40

¶41

HBKM,J W.P.No.1907 of 2026

¶42

The Court made the following Order:

¶43

Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners, the learned Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue appearing for the respondent Nos.1 to 4 and Mr. Gudapati Lakshmi Narayana, the learned Standing Counsel for the 5^th respondent.

¶44

This writ petition is filed questioning the action of the respondents particularly the respondent Nos.4 and 5 in trying to dispossess the petitioner Nos.1 to 8 from their house sites situated in Sy.No.356-2 and 356-4 of Gooty Village and Mandal, Anantapuramu District without paying compensation as per the Right to Fair Compensation Act, 2013.

¶45

On the other hand, the learned Assistant Government Pleader relying upon the written instructions of the 4^th respondent dated 27.01.2026 submits that the respondents are not admitting to dispossess the petitioners from their allotted plots in Sy.Nos.356-2 and 356-4. The proposal is only confined to Sy.No.356-3 for construction of Sewage Treatment Plant (STP) and it is a project of vital public importance, intended to improve sanitation and public health in Gooty Municipality. The project is being executed on the undisputed Government land in Sy.No.356-3 without affecting private interests in the neighboring survey numbers.

¶46