Andhra Pradesh High Court - Amravati
P Peddabba vs The State Of Andhra Pradesh on 8 July, 2021
Author: M.Satyanarayana Murthy
Bench: M.Satyanarayana Murthy
THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE M.SATYANARAYANA MURTHY
WRIT PETITON NO.13176 of 2021
ORDER:
This Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, seeking the following relief:-
"....to issue a Writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the respondents in insisting petitioners to vacate from their agricultural landed properties in different extents in survey numbers 881/4, 881/17, 881/21, 881/22, 881/23, 881/24, 881/25, 881/26, 881/27, 881/28, 881/29, 881/30, 881/31, 881/33, 881/34, 881/35, 881/37, 881/38, 81/39 & 881/40 situated at Vavila Thota Revenue Village in Puthalapattu Mandal of Chittoor District as illegal, irregular, irrational, without jurisdiction, and violative of Articles 14, 21 and 300-A of Constitution of India and consequently direct the respondents not to interfere in any manner with petitioners' peaceful possession and enjoyment over their said landed properties and pass such other orders.."
The case of the petitioners is that they are the absolute owners, possessors and enjoyers of landed properties of different extents in survey numbers 881/4, 881/17, 881/21, 881/22, 881/23, 881/24, 881/25, 881/26, 881/27, 881/28, 881/29, 881/30, 881/31, 881/33, 881/34, 881/35, 881/37, 881/38, 81/39 & 881/40 situated at Vavila Thota Revenue Village in Puthalapattu Mandal of Chittoor District. The 4th respondent granted D form pattas in favour of the petitioners duly following the provisions of Andhra Pradesh Board of Revenue Standing Order 15 vide proceedings dated 27.11.1993. Ever since such assignment, they have been in continuous possession and enjoyment of the said lands and eking out their livelihood by cultivating the same. While so, in the third week of June, 2021, the subordinates of 4th respondent repeatedly visited the subject lands of the petitioners and carried out survey and marking at their landed properties. When the petitioners enquired, they orally stated that they have been instructed by the respondents 3 & 4 to 2 conduct survey. The petitioners personally approached the 4th respondent and asked the reason. 4th respondent orally stated that the petitioners' lands are required for public purpose for providing house sites under 'Navaratnalu - pedalandariki illu' scheme. Though the petitioners stated that they were assignees of land and that they are also poor and downtrodden people and requested not to dispossess them from their lands, the 4th respondent did not heed the petitioners' grievance and orally stated that he received strict instructions from the respondents 2 & 3 to take possession of the lands. The 4th respondent further informed that if the petitioners do not vacate the premises, they will come with police force and see that the petitioners are evicted forcibly. Hence this Writ Petition.
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. The material on record prima facie establishes that the petitioners are in possession of the disputed property.
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, wherein the Supreme Court held as follows:-
"...to forcibly dispossess citizens of their private property, without following the due process of law, 1 AIR 2004 SC 4609 2 1975 AIR 1674 = 1975 SCR 299 3 1968 AIR 702 = 1968 SCR (2) 408 3 would be to violate a human right, as also the constitutional right under Article 300A of the Constitution."
Hence, recording the submission of the learned Assistant Government for Revenue and in view of the judgments of Apex Court referred above, the respondents are directed not to dispossess the petitioners, 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:08-07-2021 KK 4 THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE M.SATYANARAYANA MURTHY WRIT PETITON NO.13176 of 2021 Date:08-07-2021 KK