K.Padmanabhan, vs State Of Andhra Pradesh, Rep. By Its ...
2024 Latest Caselaw 6766 AP

Citation : 2024 Latest Caselaw 6766 AP
Judgement Date : 6 August, 2024

Andhra Pradesh High Court - Amravati

K.Padmanabhan, vs State Of Andhra Pradesh, Rep. By Its ... on 6 August, 2024

 APHC010210682014
                       IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH
                                     AT AMARAVATI                                            [3310]
                              (Special Original Jurisdiction)

                     TUESDAY ,THE SIXTH DAY OF AUGUST
                      TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FOUR

                                           PRESENT

            THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE K MANMADHA RAO

                         WRIT PETITION NO: 37915 OF 2014

Between:

K.Padmanabhan and Others                                                      ...PETITIONER(S)

                                               AND

State Of Andhra Pradesh Rep., by its Principal Secretary ...RESPONDENT(S)
and Others

Counsel for the Petitioner(S):

   1. MAHADEVA KANTHRIGALA

Counsel for the Respondent(S):

   1. GP FOR REVENUE (AP)

   2. MAHADEVA KANTHRIGALA

   3. GP FOR ENDOWMENTS (AP)

The Court made the following:

ORDER:

This Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India,

seeking the following relief:-

"....to issue a Writ of Mandamus, declaring the action of the Respondent declaring the action of the respondents 2 to 4 in directing the petitioners to evict from the land to an extent of 0.40 cents in Sy.No.325-1, Acres 1.07 cents in Sy.No.296 Acres 0.16 cents in Sy.No.255 Acres 0.37 cents in Sy.No.253-2 and Acres 1.76 cents in Sy.No. 250 of Bandameeda Kamma Palle Revenue Village, Madanapalle Mandal, Chittoor District including the temple as illegal, improper, unjust, contrary to law and violation of principles of natural justice and further direct the respondents not to interfere with the above lands belongs to the petitioners and pass such other orders....."

Though the petitioners 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 the submission made by the learned

Assistant Government Pleader for Endowments that the respondent

authorities will follow due process of law.

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."

Recording submission of the learned Assistant Government for

Endowments 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 take any coercive steps against the petitioners, except by

due process of law.

AIR 2004 SC 4609

1975 AIR 1674 = 1975 SCR 299

1968 AIR 702 = 1968 SCR (2) 408 With the above direction, this Writ Petition is disposed of with the

consent of both the counsel. However, this order will not preclude the

respondents to take appropriate steps in accordance with law. There shall be

no order as to costs.

As a sequel, Interlocutory Applications pending, if any, in this Writ