Medarametia Hanumanth Rao v. .The State Of Andhra Pradesh
Court: High Court of Andhra Pradesh
Bench: K MANMADHA RAO
Judgment date:
Case summary
High Court of Andhra Pradesh judgment dated 2025-01-27. Medarametia Hanumanth Rao v. .The State Of Andhra Pradesh. Read the judgment and case details on...
Judgment text
APHC010029162025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI [3310] (Special Original Jurisdiction) MONDAY ,THE TWENTY SEVENTH DAY OF JANUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE K MANMADHA RAO WRIT PETITION NO: 1710/2025 Between: Medarametia Hanumanth Rao ... PETITIONER AND The State Of Andhra Pradesh and Others ... RESPONDENT(S) Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. PONNEKANTI MALLIKARJUNA RAO Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. GP FOR ENDOWMENTS The Court made the following: ORDER: The Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, seeking the following relief: “….. declaring the action of the Respondents No. 2 to 4 in interrupting the petitioner without notice and without following the due process of law as illegal, arbitrary, unconstitutional, violation of the Article 14 of the Constitution of India and also violation of the principles of natural justice and consequently direct respondent No.
2 and 4 not to interfere with the peaceful possession of petitioner land, and pass such other or further orders……” 2. The case of the petitioner is that originally the property to an extent of th Ac. 2. 00 cents in Sy. No. 205 is the absolute property of the 5 respondent and he is enjoying the same since thirty (30) years without any dispute. On th 19. 07. 2020, the petitioner and 5 respondent entered into a rental agreement, as per which, the petitioner has to pay Rs. 9,000/- per acre every year to the th th 5 respondent. The petitioner took the lease from the 5 respondent and has been paying Rs. 18,000/- on every succeeding year without any default and cultivating the land without any interruption. While so, all of a sudden, the th authorities of the 4 respondent temple came to the petitioner and stated that th the subject property belongs to the 4 respondent and thereby directed the petitioner to vacate the same immediately without any notice.
Hence the present writ petition is filed. 3. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Assistant Government Pleader for Endowments, appearing for the respondents 1 to 3. 4. Perused the material on record. 5. Having regard to the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioner and on perusal of the material available on record, this Court feels it appropriate to dispose of the writ petition by directing the respondents 2 to 4 to follow due process of law, if at all, they intend to take any coercive steps against the petitioner. Till such time, the respondents 2 to 4 are directed not to interfere with the peaceful possession of the petitioner over the subject land admeasuring an extent of Ac. 2. 00 cents in Sy. No. 205 of Kunkupadu Revenue Village, Addanki Mandal, Bapatla District. 6. With the above observation, the Writ Petition is disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs. 7. As a sequel, miscellaneous applications pending, if any, shall stand closed.
_________________________ DR. K. MANMADHA RAO, J. Date: 27. 01. 2025 ARR HON’BLE DR. JUSTICE K. MANMADHA RAO Writ Petition No. 1710 of 2025 Date: 27. 01. 2025 ARR
Source: High Court of Andhra Pradesh. Dataset: Dattam Labs. CC BY 4.0. Text extracted automatically; compare with the source PDF for layout and accuracy.