Adi Venkata Subbaiah vs The State Of Ap
2021 Latest Caselaw 4107 AP

   THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE M.SATYANARAYANA MURTHY

                 WRIT PETITION NO.23752 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 action of the respondents in making efforts to dispossess the petitioners from his lands in Survey No.86-2 to an extent of 5.24 cents, at the village of Jambapuram Mandal of Kamalapuram, Kadapa District, without paying the requisite monetary consideration without following procedure established by the law as illegal, arbitrary and violation of principles of natural justice and also Articles 14, 15,16,21 and 300-A of the Constitution of India and consequently direct the respondents not to dispossess the petitioner from his land without procedure established by the law and to pay the requisite monetary consideration for the land."

Copy of Pattadar Pass Book bearing No.261 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 17.05.2021

for Fasli No.1430 also establishes that the petitioner is in possession

of Ac.5-24 cents in Sy.No.86-2. Further, the name of the pattadar is

recorded as Aadi Venkata Subbaiah in Column No.12 and nature of

acquisition is shown as „Ancestral‟. These documents would prima

facie establish that the petitioner is in possession and enjoyment of

the subject property.

During hearing, Sri Jada Sravan Kumar, 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.

Learned Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue, admitted

that the petitioner is continuing in possession of his land and the MSM,J

same was assigned to this petitioner by the competent authority and

requested to pass appropriate orders.

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