M.Saraswathy vs The District Collector
2021 Latest Caselaw 4097 AP

   THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE M.SATYANARAYANA MURTHY

                  WRIT PETITION NO.23711 OF 2021
ORDER:

This writ petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution

of India seeking the following relief:

"to issue a writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of WRIT OF MANDAMUS declaring the impugned action of the respondents in interfering with the petitioner possession and enjoyment of the property situated in S.No.333/1 of an extent of b Ac.4-86 Cents situated at Nelavoy Village S R Puram Mandal, Chittoor District and to declare the action of respondents as illegal arbitrary unconstitutional and being violative of Articles 14, 21 and 300-A of the constitution of India and in violation of principal of natural justice and consequently direct the respondents to not to interfere in to petitioner peaceful possession and enjoyment of the property situated in S.No.333/1 of an extent of Ac.4-86 Cents situated at Nelavoy Village, S.R Puram Mandal, Chittoor district."

Copy of of Pattadar Pass Book bearing No.173 is placed on

record to show that the petitioner is in possession and enjoyment of

the subject property. Apart from that, copy of Adangal dated

05.10.2021 for Fasli No.1431 also establish that the petitioner is in

possession of Ac.4-86 cents in Sy.No.333/1. Further, the name of

the pattadar is recorded as M. Saraswathy in Column No.12 and

nature of acquisition is shown as D-Patta. These documents would

prima facie establish that the petitioner is in possession and

enjoyment of the subject property.

During hearing, Sri P. Jagadish Chandra Prasad, learned

counsel for the petitioner, without touching the merits of the case,

requested this Court to issue a direction to the respondents not to

dispossess the petitioner from her land, without following due

process of law.

MSM,J

Based on written instructions of the Tahsildar, S.R. Puram in

Roc.B/159/2021 dated 18.10.2021, learned Assistant Government

Pleader for Revenue, contended that, entries were bogus and action

need be taken for deletion of those entries and requested to take

steps in accordance with law.

Admittedly, the petitioner is in possession and enjoyment of

the property. When the petitioner is in settled possession and

enjoyment of the property as per the material on record, any amount

of undue interference with the possession and enjoyment of the

property of this petitioner is illegal, arbitrary and the petitioner

cannot be dispossessed, without following due process of law, in view

of the law declared by the Apex Court in Rame Gowda (dead) by

L.Rs v. M. Varadappa Naidu (Dead) by L.Rs1.

Even by applying the principle laid down by the Apex Court in

the judgment referred supra, the person in possession cannot be

dispossessed, except by due process of law. Hence, I find that the

action of the respondents is illegal and arbitrary, since the

interference is without following due process of law. Therefore, the

respondents are directed not to dispossess the petitioner from the

property, except by due process of law.

With the above direction, the writ petition is disposed of at the

stage of admission with the consent of both the counsel. No costs.

Consequently, miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shall

also stand closed.

_________________________________________ JUSTICE M. SATYANARAYANA MURTHY Date:20.10.2021

Sp

2004 (1) SCC 769