Nakka Ravi, vs The State Of Andhra Pradesh,
2021 Latest Caselaw 2128 AP

Citation : 2021 Latest Caselaw 2128 AP
Judgement Date : 24 June, 2021

Andhra Pradesh High Court - Amravati

Nakka Ravi, vs The State Of Andhra Pradesh, on 24 June, 2021

  THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE M.SATYANARAYANA MURTHY

                   WRIT PETITON NO.11840 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, direct the Respondent No.3/ The Tahsildar, Nallajarla Mandal, West Godavari District and 4th respondent/ Panchayat Secretary, Subhadrapalem Gram Panchayat, Subhadrapalem, Nallajarla Mandal, West Godavari District, in trying to dispossess the petitioner from the land to an extent of Ac. 0.03 ½ cents, covered by R.S.No.36/2 situated in Subhadrapalem Village, Nallajarla Mandal, West Godavari District, as illegal, arbitrary and violative of articles 14, 21 and 300-A of the Constitution of India...".

Learned Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue

represented that he has not received any instructions so far, but

the learned standing counsel for Panchayat Raj represented that

the 4th respondent is not interfering in respect of the subject land,

since the land is in possession of the petitioner. However, the

apprehension of the petitioner is that the respondents 3 and 4 are

interfering with peaceful possession and enjoyment of the property.

Though, the petitioner is in possession of the property, in view of

the possession certificate issued by the Tahsildar. Hence the 4th

respondent is admittedly not interfering as per the submission

made by the learned standing counsel for the Panchayat Raj, but

in such case, the 3rd respondent is alone is interfering as alleged.

However, 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 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, 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 placed on record the written instructions

in Rc.B/80/2021, dated 18.06.2021 and fairly submitted that the

respondents are not interfering with possession of the petitioner's

property and agree to follow the due procedure as per law 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