" To Issue Any Writ Order Or ... vs M. Varadappa Naidu (D) By Lrs. & ...
2023 Latest Caselaw 3612 AP

Citation : 2023 Latest Caselaw 3612 AP
Judgement Date : 21 July, 2023

Andhra Pradesh High Court - Amravati

" To Issue Any Writ Order Or ... vs M. Varadappa Naidu (D) By Lrs. & ... on 21 July, 2023

       HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE K. MANMADHA RAO

             WRIT PETITION No.16530 of 2023
ORDER :

This petition is filed under Article 226 of the

Constitution of India for the following relief:-

" to issue any writ order or direction more particularly one in the nature of writ of mandamus declaring the action of the respondents in interfering with the lawful constructions of the petitioner and thereby demanding to stop the construction is illegal, arbitrary violation of Article 14, 21 and 300-A of the Constitution of India and to consequently direct the respondents not to interfere with the construction of the petitioner covered by building permission vide Permit No. 1086/6014/ B/Z6/ AAB/2022, dated 13.06.2023 issued by the 2nd respondent and pass such other order or orders......"

2. Heard Mr. V.V. Satish, learned counsel appearing

for the petitioner and learned Government Pleader for

Municipal Admn. Urban Dev., appearing for the

respondents.

3. The case of the petitioner is that he is the absolute

owner and possessor of residential house site bearing

D.No.14-24-30/3 situated in an extent of 200 Sq.Yds in

Sy.No.64/16B, Bhavani Nagar, Zone VI, Pedagantyada,

Visakhapatnam, vide registered sale deed Doc

No.1474/2000, dated 7.6.2000. the petitioner gifted an

extent of 100 Sq.yds each in favour of his son and daughter

under registered gift deeds vide Doc.No.s936/2011 and

937/2021. In the remaining land of 200 Sq yds the

petitioner intends to raise his house, he has applied for

building permission to the 2nd respondent and the 2nd

respondent granted permission vide Permit

No.1986/6014/B/Z6/AAB/2022, dated 13.06.2023 and

thereafter, the petitioner commenced construction. On

3.7.2023, the officers of the 2nd respondent along with staff

of 4th respondent and Ward secretariat staff came to the

petitioner's house site and demanded to stop construction

alleging that the 4th respondent is claiming the land.

Therefore, the action of the respondents in interfering with

lawful construction of the petitioner without following due

process of law is illegal and arbitrary. Hence the present

writ petition.

4. Though the petitioner made several allegations in the

writ affidavit filed along with the writ petition, the truth or

otherwise in those allegations need not be adjudicated by this

Court, in view of submission made by the 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 land.

5. 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."

6. Hence, recording submission of the learned

Government Pleader for Revenue, as there is no proposal to

take possession of the subject land, and in view of the

judgments of Apex Court referred above, the respondents are

directed not to interfere with the construction of the petitioner

covered by building permission vide Permit

AIR 2004 SC 4609

1975 AIR 1674 = 1975 SCR 299

1968 AIR 702 = 1968 SCR (2) 408

No.1086/6014/B/Z6/AAB/2022, dated 13.06.2023, except by

due process of law.

7. With the above direction, this Writ Petition is