Obili Gangamma, vs The State Of Andhra Pradesh,
2021 Latest Caselaw 2492 AP

Citation : 2021 Latest Caselaw 2492 AP
Judgement Date : 20 July, 2021

Andhra Pradesh High Court - Amravati

Obili Gangamma, vs The State Of Andhra Pradesh, on 20 July, 2021

Bench: M.Satyanarayana Murthy

      THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE M.SATYANARAYANA MURTHY

                           WRIT PETITON NO.13743 of 2021

ORDER:

This Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the

Constitution of India, seeking the following relief:-

"....pleased to issue a Writ of Mandamus or any other appropriate writ order or direction declaring the high handed action of the Respondents No 2 to 7 in interfering with the possession of the Petitioners land in Sy No 579/3 to an extent of Ac 0.50 cents and Sy No 580/4 to an extent of Ac 0.50 cents and Sy No 579/4 to an extent of Ac 0.30 cents obanapalli revenue village Railway kodur Mandal Y S R Kadapa District as illegal improper unjust arbitrary and contrary to law and without following due procedure contemplated under law and pass.."

Though the petitioners 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

the 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

petitioners are in possession of the disputed property.

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,

wherein 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."

AIR 2004 SC 4609

1975 AIR 1674 = 1975 SCR 299

1968 AIR 702 = 1968 SCR (2) 408

Hence, recording the submission of the learned Assistant

Government for Revenue and in view of the judgments of Apex

Court referred above, the respondents are directed not to

dispossess the petitioners, except by due process of law.

With the above direction, this Writ Petition is disposed of, 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.