Andhra Pradesh High Court - Amravati
Muppala Babulu vs The State Of Andhra Pradesh on 28 February, 2020
Author: M.Satyanarayana Murthy
Bench: M.Satyanarayana Murthy
THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE M.SATYANARAYANA MURTHY
WRIT PETITON NO.4720 of 2020
ORDER:
This petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India to issue a Writ of Mandamus, declaring the action of the respondents in trying to interfere with peaceful possession and enjoyment of the land to an extent of Ac. 1.50 cents consisting of Ac.0.55 cents in Sy.No. 967/2 and Ac. 0.95 cents in Sy.No. 968/1 bounded by East: Land of Muppala Lingaiah, Muppala Peda Narayana, Muppala Anasuya and Muppala Dhanamma; West: Tar Road Donka and Tar Road, South: Muppala Babulu and Revenue Bode/ Government land; North : Revenue Bode/ Government land of Sirigipadu Village, Veldurrthi Mandal, Guntur District in most high handed and illegal manner even without putting the petitioner on notice or following procedure contemplated under law and trying to dispossess the petitioner from the said land and trying to deprive the petitioner from enjoying the aforesaid property as being illegal, arbitrary, apart from being in violation of Articles 14 and 21 of Constitution of India.
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 Revenue that the respondent authorities will follow due process of law.
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:- 1
Appeal (civil) 7662 of 1997 2 1975 AIR 1674 = 1975 SCR 299 2 "...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 Revenue as there is no proposal to interfere with the possession of subject land, and in view of the judgments of Apex Court referred above, the respondents are directed not to take any coercive steps, except by due process of law.
With the above direction, this Writ Petition is disposed of, at the stage of admission, 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 Petition, shall stand closed.
___________________________________ JUSTICE M. SATYANARAYANA MURTHY Date: 28-02-2020 IS 3 1968 AIR 702 = 1968 SCR (2) 408 3 THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE M.SATYANARAYANA MURTHY WRIT PETITON NO.4720 of 2020 Date: 28-02-2020 IS