Konda Bhaskar Reddy vs The State Of Andhra Pradesh,
2021 Latest Caselaw 2809 AP

Citation : 2021 Latest Caselaw 2809 AP
Judgement Date : 3 August, 2021

Andhra Pradesh High Court - Amravati

Konda Bhaskar Reddy vs The State Of Andhra Pradesh, on 3 August, 2021

  THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE M.SATYANARAYANA MURTHY

                    WRIT PETITON NO.15392 of 2021

ORDER:

This petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of

India, seeking the following relief:-

"....to issue a Writ of Mandamus, to declare the action of the Respondents and their personnel trying to disposes petitioners from his agriculture land situated in Sy.No.139/1 to an extent of Ac.0.40 cents and in Sy.No.20/1 to an extent of Ac.1.08 cents situated at Ankanagodugunur Village, B. Koduru Mandal, Y S R Kadapa District without following due process of law as illegal arbitrary and violation of principles of natural justice besides violative of Articles 21 of the Constitution of India and consequently direct the Respondents not interfere with the possession and enjoyment of the petitioners agriculture land situated in Sy.No.139/1 to an extent of Ac.0.40 cents and in Sy.No.20/1 to an extent of Ac.1.08 cents situated at Ankanagodugunur Village, B. Koduru Mandal, Y S R Kadapa District without following due process of law and pass such other order or orders..."

It is the case of petitioner that he is the owner and possessor

of the agriculture land situated in Sy.No.139/1 to an extent of

Ac.0.40 cents and in Sy.No.20/1 to an extent of Ac.1.08 cents

situated at Ankanagodugunur Village, B.Koduru Mandal,

Y.S.R.Kadapa District. The land is assigned to him on 29.02.2005

by the 4th respondent vide DKT Patta No.155/1415. Since then, he

is in possession and enjoyment over the land by cultivating the

same.

The 4th respondent without there being any palpable cause,

without issuing any notices, without there being any proceedings

interfering with peaceful possession and enjoyment of the

petitioner's agriculture lands and trying to dispossess him without

following due process of law, which is illegal and arbitrary.

Though the petitioner made several allegations in the writ

affidavit filed along with the writ petition, the truth or otherwise in

those allegations need not be adjudicated by this Court, in view of

submission made by the learned Assistant Government Pleader for

Revenue that the respondent authorities will follow due process of

law. The material on record prima facie establishes that the

petitioner is in possession of the disputed land.

It is settled law that a person in settled possession cannot be

dispossessed forcibly as held in Rame Gowda (D) By Lrs vs M.

Varadappa Naidu (D) By Lrs. & Anr1, Ram Rattan v. State of

Uttar Pradesh2 and Munshi Ram v. Delhi Administration3, the

Supreme Court held as follows:-

"...to forcibly dispossess citizens of their private

property, without following the due process of law,

would be to violate a human right, as also the

constitutional right under Article 300A of the

Constitution."

Hence, recording submission of the learned Assistant

Government Pleader for Revenue, as there is no proposal to take

possession of the subject land, and in view of the judgments of

Apex Court referred above, the respondents are directed not to

dispossess the petitioner from the subject property, except by due

process of law.

With the above direction, this Writ Petition is allowed, at the

stage of admission, with the consent of both the counsel. However,

this order will not preclude the respondents to take appropriate

steps in accordance with law. There shall be no order as to costs.

AIR 2004 SC 4609

1975 AIR 1674 = 1975 SCR 299