Andhra Pradesh High Court - Amravati
K.Ramanjaneyulu, Ananthapuram ... vs Prl. Secretary, Revenue Dept., ... on 9 November, 2022
HONOURABLE SMT. JUSTICE V.SUJATHA
WRIT PETITION No.10047 of 2015
ORDER
This petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution
of India, seeking the following relief:-
"....to issue Writ of Mandamus, declaring the action on part of the 4th
respondent in trying to dispossess the petitioners from the land
admeasuring Ac.0.05 cents each i.e., Plot Nos. 48 and 54 respectively
in Survey Nos. 231, 208 and 207 situated at Itikalapalli Village,
Anantapuram Mandal and District, without any order in writing as
illegal, arbitrary, violation of principles of natural justice and
consequently direct the respondents 1 to 4 not to dispossess the
petitioners from the land admeasuring Ac.0.05 cents each i e Plot Nos.
48 and 54 respectively in Survey Nos. 231, 208 and 207 situated at
Itikalapalli Village, Anantapuram Mandal and District and pass such
other order or orders as this Hon‟ble Court may deem fit and proper in
the circumstances of the case ..."
When this Writ Petition came for admission, this Court has
passed an Interim Order on 09.04.2015, which is as follows:
„There shall be interim direction as prayed for.
The petitioner's claim is only to follow the due
process of law, in case the respondents are attempting to
interfere with or dispossess the petitioners from the subject
lands.
When the matter came up for hearing, learned counsel for
the petitioners reiterated the contentions urged in the petition.
On the other hand, the learned Assistant Government Pleader
for Revenue submitted that they will follow due process of law, if
at all the petitioners are in possession and enjoyment of the
land admeasuring ac.0.05 cents each i.e., Plot No.48 and 54
respectively in Itikalapalli Village, Anantapuram Mandal and
District.
It is also 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."
Though there are several allegations in the writ petition,
the truth or otherwise of the allegations need not be adjudicated
by this Court, in view of the submission made by the learned
Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue at the time of
AIR 2004 SC 4609
1975 AIR 1674 = 1975 SCR 299
1968 AIR 702 = 1968 SCR (2) 408
hearing and also by applying the principle laid down in the
above judgment to the present facts of the case, without going
into the merits of the case, the Writ Petition is disposed of
directing the respondent-authorities not to interfere with the
possession and enjoyment of the petitioners over the subject
lands, if at all the petitioners are in possession and enjoyment
of the subject lands and till the pattas were existing in the name
of the petitioners, without following due process as
contemplated under law.
With the above direction, this Writ Petition is disposed of,
with the consent of both the counsel. There shall be no order
as to costs.
As a sequel, Interlocutory Applications pending, if any, in
this Writ Petition, shall stand closed.
______________________
JUSTICE V.SUJATHA
Date : 09.11.2022
AVTP
HONOURABLE SMT. JUSTICE V.SUJATHA
WRIT PETITION No.10047 of 2015
Date : 09.11.2022
AVTP
