Andhra Pradesh High Court - Amravati
Shaik Hussain Bee W/O Shaik ... vs The State Of Andhra Pradesh, Rep. ... on 9 November, 2022
HONOURABLE SMT. JUSTICE V.SUJATHA
WRIT PETITION No.13468 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 of the respondents
in interfering with the possession and enjoyment of the land
admeasuring Ac.1.63 cents in R.S.No.138/2(Patta No.55) of Kalaturu
village, Aagiripalli Mandal, Krishna District, and not considering the
application of petitioners for correction entry in the revenue records, as
illegal, arbitrary, unconstitutional and violation of principles of natural
justice and to 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 Order on 30.04.2015, which is as follows:
„The possession of the petitioners shall not be interfered without
following due process of law‟.
The petitioners' claim is that they are possession and
enjoyment of the subject land under patta No.55, as such to
consider the application of petitioners for correction in revenue
records and to follow the due process of law, in case the
respondents are attempting to interfere with the possession and
enjoyment of the petitioners over the subject lands.
The respondent No.3 filed counter, denying the contention
of the petitioners and stated that the subject land is classified
as Burial Ground. As per records, the villagers are using this
land as burial ground for several years and the above said land
is not under the possession and enjoyment of the writ
Petitioners or their ancestors and further stated that it is not
possible to correct the entry in the Revenue Records in the
name of the Writ Petitioners.
When the matter came up for hearing, learned counsel for
the petitioner reiterated the contentions urged in the petition
and the learned Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue
submitted that respondent-authorities will follow due process of
law, if at all the petitioner was in possession and enjoyment of
the subject lands.
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:-
AIR 2004 SC 4609
1975 AIR 1674 = 1975 SCR 299
1968 AIR 702 = 1968 SCR (2) 408
"...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."
On perusal of the entire material on record and also the
counter filed by the 3rd respondent, nowhere it is stated that
any orders have been passed on the application made by the
petitioners on 02.03.2015.
In view of the above, 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
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, this court it appropriate to dispose of Writ
Petition.
Accordingly, this Writ Petition is disposed of, with the
consent of both the counsel, directing the respondent-
authorities to dispose of the representation made by the
petitioner on 02.03.2015 if not yet disposed of, in accordance
with law, within four (04) weeks from the date of receipt of a
copy of this order and the respondents are further directed not
to interfere with the possession and enjoyment of the petitioners
over the subject lands, if at all petitioners are in possession and
enjoyment of the subject lands, without following due process
as contemplated under law.
With the above directions, 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.13468 of 2015
Date : 09.11.2022
AVTP
