Andhra Pradesh High Court - Amravati
Komera Venkata Ramana S/O Nagappa, vs The State Of Andhra Pradesh, on 9 November, 2022
HONOURABLE SMT. JUSTICE V.SUJATHA
WRIT PETITION No.7251 of 2015
ORDER
This petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, seeking the following relief:-
"....to issue Writ of Mandamus or any other appropriate Writ direction or order declaring the action of the Respondents No.3 and 4 in making efforts to dispossess the petitioner from peaceful possession and enjoyment of his agriculture land admeasuring an extent of Ac.1.32 Cents in Survey No.45/12, Bandlapalli village, Talapula Mandal, Anantapur District, as illegal, irregular, irrational without jurisdiction and violative of Articles 14, 21 and 300A of constitution of India and consequently direct the Respondents No.3 to 4 not to dispossess the Petitioner from his agriculture land admeasuring an extent of Ac 1.32 Cents in Survey No.45/12, Bandlapalli Village, Talapula Mandal, Anantapur District, without following due process of law ..."
When this Writ Petition came for admission, this Court has passed an Interim Order on 20.03.2015, which is as follows:
„There shall be Interim Direction as prayed for‟. When the matter came up for hearing, learned counsel for the petitioners reiterated the contentions urged in the petition.
On the other hand, the learned Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue submitted that the respondent-authorities will follow due process of law, if at all the petitioner was in possession and enjoyment of the agricultural land in an extent 2 of Ac.1.32 cents in Survey No.45/12, Bandlapalli Village, Talapula Mandal, Anantapur District.
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:-
"...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."
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, the Writ Petition is disposed of directing the respondent-authorities not to interfere with the possession and enjoyment of the petitioner over the subject land, if at all petitioner is in possession and enjoyment of the subject land, without following due process as contemplated under law.
1 AIR 2004 SC 4609 2 1975 AIR 1674 = 1975 SCR 299 3 1968 AIR 702 = 1968 SCR (2) 408 3 With the above direction, 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 4 12 HONOURABLE SMT. JUSTICE V.SUJATHA WRIT PETITION No.7251 of 2015 Date : 09.11.2022 AVTP 5