Andhra Pradesh High Court - Amravati
Barnikala Naidu vs The State Of Andhra Pradesh on 3 March, 2020
Author: M.Satyanarayana Murthy
Bench: M.Satyanarayana Murthy
THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE M.SATYANARAYANA MURTHY
WRIT PETITION NO.5084 of 2020
ORDER:
This writ petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking the following relief:
"to issue a Writ/Order/Direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the respondents interfering with petitioners peaceful possession and enjoyment of assigned land admeasuring Ac. 0-91 cents in Sy.No.237/2 and Ac. 0.20 cents in Sy.No. 237/5 total Ac. 1-11 cents in Mallam Village, Buchayyapeta Mandal, Visakhapatnam District covered by D-Form Patta bearing DR.No.939/94/B dt.18-3-1994 without issuing any notice/ application and without following due process of law as illegal, arbitrary, and violative of principles of Art.14, 19 and 300A of the Constitution of India and consequently direct the Respondents not to interfere with petitioners peaceful possession and enjoyment of the above subject lands in any manner, as per law."
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:-
"...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 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. 1 Appeal (civil) 7662 of 1997 2 1975 AIR 1674 = 1975 SCR 299 3 1968 AIR 702 = 1968 SCR (2) 408 MSM,J WP_5084_2020 2 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.
The miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shall also stand closed.
_______________________________ JUSTICE M. SATYANARAYANA MURTHY Date: 03-03-2020 IS MSM,J WP_5084_2020 3 THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE M.SATYANARAYANA MURTHY WRIT PETITION NO.5084 of 2020 Date: 03-03-2020 IS