Disposed¶47

N Anusha v. the State of Ap

Andhra Pradesh HC6 Apr 2026WP/8998/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Grama Kantam house plot eviction pressure; police interference with personal life and liberty; Anganwadi Centre construction; Sy. No. 56 Mottakadirigaanur Revenue Village Kuppam Mandal Chittoor District; no land acquisition proceedings initiated; Land Acquisition Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act 2013; Articles 14 19 21 300A; Article 226 writ of mandamus; Kuppam Police Station summons denial; purely civil dispute; due process of law; non-interference direction; disposed without costs; Andhra Pradesh High Court at Amaravati; Dr. Y. Lakshmana Rao; 2026.

What did the court decide?

Respondent Nos. 4 to 6 directed not to interfere in the civil disputes pending between the petitioners and respondent Nos. 7 to 9 without following due process of law; writ petition disposed of; no order as to costs; pending miscellaneous petitions, if any, stand closed.

N Anusha Vs the State of Ap — Land Acquisition | Andhra Pradesh HC (2026)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶47

Issue for consideration

Whether respondent Nos. 4 to 6 interfered with the petitioners' personal life and liberty by calling them to the police station and pressurising them to vacate their Grama Kantam house plots in Sy. No. 56, Mottakadirigaanur Revenue Village, Kuppam Mandal, Chittoor District, stated to be required for construction of an Anganwadi Centre without initiating land acquisition proceedings. +1 more

¶41

Court's answer

The Court directed respondent Nos. 4 to 6 not to interfere in the civil disputes pending between the petitioners and respondent Nos. 7 to 9, without following due process of law.

¶46

Ratio / Principle

Considering the entire facts and circumstances of the case, and recording the submissions of the learned Assistant Government Pleader, the Court disposed of the writ petition.

¶46

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Andhra Pradesh High Court (Amaravati), W.P. No. 8998 of 2026, decided 07.04.2026 by Dr. Y. Lakshmana Rao, J: Five petitioners, residents of Mottakadirigaanur Revenue Village, Kuppam Mandal, Chittoor District, filed a writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution alleging that respondent Nos. 4 to 6 (police officials up to Circle Inspector level) were interfering with their personal life and liberty by calling them to the police station and pressurising them to vacate Grama Kantam house plots admeasuring Ac. 333.33 sq. yards, 166.66 sq. yards, 138.88 sq. yards, 166.66 sq. yards, 138.88 sq. yards and 0.0150 sq. yards in Sy. No. 56, stated to be required for construction of an Anganwadi Centre at the instance of revenue officials and private respondent Nos. 7 to 9, without initiating land acquisition proceedings. Sri P. Ajay Babu, learned Assistant Government Pleader, submitted on written instructions that no person had approached Kuppam Police Station nor was any individual summoned, and that the dispute was purely civil in nature. Recording those submissions and considering the facts, the Court disposed of the petition, directing respondent Nos. 4 to 6 not to interfere in the civil disputes pending between the petitioners and respondent Nos. 7 to 9 without following due process of law; there was no order as to costs and pending miscellaneous petitions stood closed.

¶1

[3521]

¶2

APHC010149992026

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI

¶4

(Special Original Jurisdiction)

¶5

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

¶6

PRESENT

¶7

THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE Y. LAKSHMANA RAO WRIT PETITION NO: 8998/2026

¶8

Between:

¶9

N ANUSHA, W/O. M.THULASIRAM NAIK AGED ABOUT 27 YEARS, OCC- HOUSE WIFE R/O. DR,NO.1-09, PONNAMGURU VILLAGE, MALLAANURU POST, KUPPAM MANDAL,CHITTOOR DISTRICT.

¶10

V.NAGARJUNA, S/O. S.VENKATACHALAPATHI AGED ABOUT 35 YEARS, OCC- AGRICULTURE R/O. DR,NO.1-48(1), PONNAMGURU VILLAGE, MALLAANURU POST KUPPAM MANDAL, CHITTOOR DISTRICT.

¶11

V ASHWINI,, W/O. G.MANJU NATH, AGED ABOUT 37 YEARS, OCCAGRICULTURE R/O. DR.NO.208, 4TH CROSS, MODEL HOUSE STREET, BASAVANNA TEMPLE, BANGALORE SOUTH, BANGALORE, KARNATAKA.

¶12

KANCHANA,, W/O. V.NAGARJUNA, AGED ABOUT 32 YEARS, OCCHOUSE WIFE R/O. DR.NO.1-48(1), PONNAMGURU VILLAGE, MALLAANURU POST, KUPPAM MANDAL, CHITTOOR DISTRICT.

¶13

SUMITHRA, W/O. T.NARASIMURTHY , AGED ABOUT 36 YEARS, OCCHOUSE WIFE R/O. MALLAANURU VILLAGE AND POST,KUPPAM MANDAL CHITTOOR DISTRICT.

¶14

...PETITIONER(S)

¶15

AND

¶16

THE STATE OF AP, REP., BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, HOME DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT BUILDINGS, VELAGAPUDI, GUNTUR DISTRICT.522238

¶17

¶18

Dr. YLR, J W.P.No.8998 of 2026

¶19

Dated 07.04.2026

¶20

THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, CHITTOOR DISTRICT, CHITTOOR.517001

¶21

THE SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, CHITTOOR DISTRICT, CHITTOOR.517001

¶22

THE DEPUTY SUPERINTENDENT POLICE, CHITTOOR, CHITTOOR DISTRICT.517001

¶23

THE SUB INSPECTOR POLICE, KUPPAM POLICE STATION, CHITTOOR DISTRICT.517425

¶24

THE CIRCLE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, KUPPAM POLICE STATION, CHITTOOR DISTRICT.517425

¶25

JAI SUDHA, W/O VIBUSHAN AGED ABOUT 37 YEARS, OCCHOUSE WIFE R/O. MALLAANURU VILLAGE AND POST, KUPPAM MANDAL CHITTOOR DISTRICT.517425

¶26

MANJU, W/O SHANTHA KUMAR AGED ABOUT 39 YEARS, OCC HOUSE WIFE R/O. MALLAANURU VILLAGE AND POST, KUPPAM MANDAL CHITTOOR DISTRICT.517425

¶27

SANGEETHA, WO VIJAY KUMAR AGED ABOUT 29 YEARS, OCCHOUSE WIFE R/O. MALLAANURU VILLAGE AND POST, KUPPAM MANDAL, CHITTOOR DISTRICT.517425

¶28

...RESPONDENT(S):

¶29

Counsel for the Petitioner(S):

¶30

S PARINEETA

¶31

Counsel for the Respondent(S):

¶32

GP FOR HOME

¶33

¶34

Dr. YLR, J W.P.No.8998 of 2026 Dated 07.04.2026

¶35

The Court made the following:

¶36

ORDER :

¶37

The Writ Petition has been filed under Article 226 of the Constitution

¶38

of India seeking the following relief:-

¶39

“…to issue an appropriate Writ Order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the respondents No 4 to 6 in interfering with the petitioners personal life and liberty by calling the petitioners to their police station and pressurizing the petitioners to vacate the Grama Kantam house plots belongs to the petitioners in an extant of an Ac 333 33 Sq Yards 166 66 Sq Yards 138 88 Sq Yards 166 66 Sq Yards 138 88 Sq Yards and 0 0150 Sq Yards in Sy No 56 in Mottakadirigaanur Revenue Village Kuppam Mandal Chittoor District respectively at the instance of the revenue officials and the respondents No 7 to 9 stating that the same is required for construction Anganvadi center without initiating any land acquisition Proceedings and following due process of law as arbitrary illegal voilative of the principles of natural justice contrary to the provisions of the Land Acquisition Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act 2013 and apart from being voilative of fundamental and Constitutional Rights guaranteed to the petitioners under Articles 14 19 21 and 300A of the Constitution of India consequently direct the respondents No 4 to 6 not to interfere with the petitioners personal life liberty by calling upon to their police station pass….”

¶40

Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned Assistant Government Pleader.

¶41

Ms. S. Parineeta, learned counsel for the petitioners, submits that respondent Nos. 4 to 6 are interfering with the petitioners’ personal life and liberty by calling them to the police station and pressurizing them to vacate the Grama Kantam house plots belonging to the petitioners, admeasuring Ac. 333.33 sq. yards, 166.66 sq. yards, 138.88 sq. yards, 166.66 sq. yards, 138.88 sq. yards, and 0.0150 sq. yards in Sy. No. 56 of Mottakadirigaanur Revenue Village, Kuppam Mandal, Chittoor District, at the instance of the

¶42

¶43

Dr. YLR, J W.P.No.8998 of 2026 Dated 07.04.2026

¶44

revenue officials and respondent Nos. 7 to 9, stating that the same are required for construction of an Anganwadi Centre, without initiating any land acquisition proceedings.

¶45

Sri P. Ajay Babu, learned Assistant Government Pleader, on written instructions, submits that no person approached Kuppam Police Station in connection with the above issue, nor was any individual summoned to the police station in this regard. Thus, the police have neither interfered in the matter nor exerted any pressure on any person concerned, as the dispute has been found to be purely civil in nature.

¶46

Considering the entire facts and circumstances of the case, and recording the submissions of the learned Assistant Government Pleader, the Writ Petition is disposed of, directing respondent Nos. 4 to 6 not to interfere in the civil disputes pending between the petitioners and respondent Nos. 7 to 9, without following due process of law.

¶47

With the above observations and directions, the Writ Petition is disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs.

¶48

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

¶49

_________________________ DR. Y. LAKSHMANA RAO, J

¶50

Date: 07.04.2026 RSI

¶51

¶52

Dr. YLR, J W.P.No.8998 of 2026 Dated 07.04.2026

¶53

188

¶54

THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE Y. LAKSHMANA RAO

¶55

WRIT PETITION NO: 8998 of 2026

¶56

Date:07.04.2026 RSI

N Anusha v. the State of Ap

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

N Anusha v. the State of Ap

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Chinna Mohan Kumar Vs the State of Andhra Pradesh

Shaik Bara Shahid Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh

Mr Biddappa Ponnappa Bittianda Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh

Allu Appanna, Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh

K Rajani Vs the State of Andhra Pradesh

Chinthala Ramaswamy Vs the State of Ap