Mohammad Usman Baig Vs the State of Andhra Pradesh

MOHAMMAD USMAN BAIG, S/O.MOHAMMAD IBRAHIM BAIG, AGED ABOUT 80 YEARS, R/O. QUARTER NO.149, SIHS COLONY, VIJAYAWADA (URBAN), VIDYADHARAPURAM, KRISHNA DISTRICT.

¶11

...PETITIONER

¶12

AND

¶13

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

¶14

THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, KRISHNA DISTRICT, MACHILIPATNAM.

¶15

THE REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER, MACHILIPATNAM, KRISHNA DISTRICT.

¶16

THE TAHSILDAR, GUDURU MANDAL KRISHNA DISTRICT.

¶17

THE VILLAGE REVENUE OFFICER, PATHANPETA,GUDURU MANDAL KRISHNA DISTRICT.

¶18

...RESPONDENT(S):

¶19

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 a Writ, Order or Direction, more particularly one in the nature of Mandamus, declaring the action of the

¶20

2

¶21

Respondents 3 to 5 in interfering with the peaceful possession and enjoyment of the petitioner's property in Sy.No.443/2 an extent of Ac.2.00 cts, situated in Guduru Village and Mandal Krishna District, which is illegal, improper, arbitrary and violation of Articles 14 and 21 of the Constitution of India, consequently direct the Respondents not to interfere into the peaceful possession of the petitioner's land in Sy.No.443/2 an extent of Ac.2.00 cts, situated in Guduru Village and Mandal, Krishna District and pass

¶22

IA NO: 1 OF 2026

¶23

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 not to interfere into the peaceful possession of the petitioner's land in Sy.No.443/2 an extent of Ac.2.00 cts, situated in Guduru Village and Mandal, Krishna District, pending disposal of the above writ petition, in the interest of justice and pass

¶24

Counsel for the Petitioner:

¶25

1.HARINADH NIDAMANURI

¶26

Counsel for the Respondent(S):

¶27

1.GP FOR REVENUE

¶28

3

¶29

The Court made the following Order:

¶30

Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Assistant Government Pleader for the respondents.

¶31

This writ petition is filed questioning the action of the respondent Nos.3 to 5 in interfering with the peaceful possession and enjoyment of the petitioner’s property in Sy.No.443/2 in an extent of Ac.2.00 cents situated in Guduru Village and Mandal, Krishna District.

¶32

On the other hand, the learned Assistant Government Pleader relying upon the written instructions of the 4^th respondent dated 23.03.2026 submits that the petitioner is stated to have obtained pattadar passbook and title deed have to be verified from the revenue records. The petitioner is stated to have paid water tax in respect of the subject land. The petitioner claimed to be in possession and cultivation of the land in R.S.No.443/2 and at that stage, the Village Revenue Officer, Guduru and Mandal Revenue Inspector, Guduru have rightly intervened and prevented such activity.

¶33

The land in R.S.No.443/3 is a government land alienated in favour of the Krishna University and the 2^nd respondent already handed over the advance possession of the said land to the Krishna University vide Rc.No.E1/1086/2008, dated 11.05.2010. Therefore, the action of the revenue authorities in entering the land in R.S.No.443/3 and preventing the petitioner from making an illegal lay out is lawful and

¶34

4

¶35

justified. The petitioner is attempting to mislead the Hon’ble Court by projecting the issue as interference in his patta land in R.S.No.443/2, whereas the actual illegal interference is by the petitioner with respect to the government land in R.S.No.443/3 and there is no interference whatsoever by the revenue authorities with the petitioner’s alleged possession in R.S.No.443/2.

¶36

In view of the above said facts and circumstances, recording the said instructions of the 4^th respondent dated 23.03.2026, as there is no interference by the revenue authorities concerned as alleged by the petitioner with respect to the subject land in an extent of Ac.2.00 cents in Sy.No.443/2 of Guduru Village and Mandal, Krishna District, no further orders are necessary in this writ petition.

¶37

Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of. The written instructions of the 4^th respondent dated 23.03.2026 shall be made as part of the court record. Interim order, if any, deemed to have been vacated. There shall be no order as to costs.

¶38

As a sequel, Miscellaneous Petitions pending, if any, shall stand closed.

¶39

_________________________ JUSTICE B KRISHNA MOHAN

¶40

06.04.2026 NNN

Mohammad Usman Baig v. the State of Andhra Pradesh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mohammad Usman Baig v. the State of Andhra Pradesh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Vanteru Lakshmamma Vs the State of Andhra Pradesh

Kolkar Mabu Vs the State of Andhra Pradesh

Ullipayala Usha Rani Vs the State of Andhra Pradesh

M Venkatesh Vs the State of Ap

Cbcnc Andhra Batish Town Church Vs the State of Ap

T Ammulu Vs the State of Andhra Pradesh