Nannam Mathamma, vs State Of Andhra Pradesh,
2021 Latest Caselaw 2549 AP

Citation : 2021 Latest Caselaw 2549 AP
Judgement Date : 23 July, 2021

Andhra Pradesh High Court - Amravati

Nannam Mathamma, vs State Of Andhra Pradesh, on 23 July, 2021

Bench: M.Satyanarayana Murthy

      THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE M.SATYANARAYANA MURTHY

                       WRIT PETITON NO.14107 of 2021

ORDER:

This Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the

Constitution of India, seeking the following relief:-

"....to issue a Writ of Mandamus, declaring the action of the Respondents more particularly the Respondent Nos. 2 to 4 in interfering with the Petitioners occupation, possession and enjoyment of properties admeasuring an extent of Ac 0.65 cents in Sy.No 272/2B3, Ac. 0.67 cents in Sy No 272/2B4, Ac.0.67 cents in Sy.No.272/2B5 and Ac.0.67 cents in Sy.No 272/2B6 situate in Vaviletipadu Village, Nellore Mandal, SPSR Nellore District as being illegal, arbitrary, unjust and also in violation of Article 14, 21 and 300A of the Constitution of India and consequently direct the Respondents not to interfere with the peaceful possession and occupation of the Petitioners with respect to the subject property in admeasuring an extent of Ac.0.65 cents in Sy.No. 272/2B3, Ac 0.67 cents in Sy.No 272/2B4, Ac 0.67 cents in Sy.No 272/2B5 and Ac.0.67 cents in Sy.No 272/2B6 situated in Vaviletipadu Village Nellore Mandal SPSR Nellore District...."

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. In view of copy of the Adangal filed by the petitioners for the

falsi 1430 shows that the petitioners are in possession and

enjoyment of the property in their own right as on date.

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

AIR 2004 SC 4609

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 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 take any

coercive steps, 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.

As a sequel, Interlocutory Applications pending, if any, in

this Writ Petition, shall stand closed.