LawSphereX

J THATHA REDDY v. State of Andhra Pradesh

Court: High Court of Andhra Pradesh

Bench: GANNAMANENI RAMAKRISHNA PRASAD

Judgment date:

Case summary

High Court of Andhra Pradesh judgment dated 2025-02-10. J THATHA REDDY v. State of Andhra Pradesh. Read the judgment and case details on LawSphereX.

Judgment text

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH :: AMARAVATI^-^ (Special Original Jurisdiction) MONDAY, THE TENTH DAY OF FEBRUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE GANNAMANENI RAMAKRISHNA PRASAD WRIT PETITION NO: 3432 OF 2025 Between: 1. J Thatha Reddy, S/o. Rami Reddy, aged 51 years, Occ. Cultivation, R/o. 5-61, Kothapalli, Thimminaidupalem, Tirupati Urban Mandal, Tirupati Dist. 2. Smt J Hemamalini, W/o. Thatha Reddy, aged 47 years, Occ. Cultivation, R/o. 5-61, Kothapalli, Thimminaidupalem, Tirupati Urban Mandal, Tirupati Dist. ... Petitioners AND 1. State of Andhra Pradesh, rep by its Principal Secretary, RevenWDept. Secretariat, Velagapudi, Guntur. 2. Collector and District Magistrate, Tirupati DistricTat Tirupati. 3. Revenue Divisional Officer, Tirupati Division, Tirupati District. 4. Tahsildar, Tirupati Urbairl^/iandal. Tirupati, Tirupati District. ...

Respondents Petition under Article 2Wof the Constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased to issue a Writ/Order/ Direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the Respondents in trying to evict them from the land to an extent of 120 Sq. Yards, situated in Sy. No. 72/3 of Thimminaidupalem Village, Tirupati Urban Mandal, Tirupati District pursuant to Sale Deeds as illegal, arbitrary, contrary to law. ^^olation of Principles of Natural Justice, besides violation of Art. 14 & 21 the respondents to i^f |tTe Constitution of India and consequently direct follow due process of law against them.

lA NO: 1 OF 2025 Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to direct the 4th Respondent not to demolish the residential house of the petitioners by dispossessing them in an extent of 120 Sq. Yards situated in Sy. No. 72/3 of Thimminaidupalem(V), Tirupati Urban Mandal, Tirupati District forthwith pending disposal of the Writ Petition. Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI. SRINIVASULU KURRA Counsel for the Respondents: GP FOR REVENUE The Court made the following order: * APHC010065152025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI [3328] (Special Original Jurisdiction) MONDAY ,THE TENTH DAY OF FEBRUARY J TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE GANNAMANENI RAMAKRISHNA PRASAD WRIT PETITION NO: 3432/2025 Between: 1. J THATHA REDDY, S/O. RAMI REDDY, AGED 51 YEARS, OCC. CULTIVATION, R/0.

5-61, KOTHAPALLI, THIMMINAIDUPALEM, TIRUPATI URBAN MANDAL, TIRUPATI DIST, 2. SMT J HEMAMALINI, W/0. THATHA REDDY, AGED 47 YEARS, OCC. CULTIVATION, R/0. 5-61 KOTHAPALLI THIMMINAIDUPALEM, TIRUPATI URBAN MANDAL, TIRUPATI DIST. ... PETITIONER{S) AND 1. STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, REVENUE DEPT, SECRETARIAT, VELAGAPUDI, GUNTUR. 2. COLLECTOR AND DISTRICT MAGISTRATE, TIRUPATI DISTRICT AT TIRUPATI. 3. REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER, TIRUPATI DIVISION TIRUPATI DISTRICT. 4. TAHSILDAR, TIRUPATI URBAN MANDAL. TIRUPATI, TIRUPATI DISTRICT. ... RESPONDENT(S): Counsel for the Petitioner(S): 1. SRINIVASULU KURRA Counsel for the Respondent{S): 1. GP FOR REVENUE The Court made the following: ORAL ORDER: Writ Petitioners Heard Sri Srinivasulu Kurra, learned Counsel for the and Sri K. Arjun Chowdhary, learned Assistant Government Pleader Revenue appearing for all the Respondents. 2. Sri K.

Arjun Chowdhary, learned Assistant Government Pleader the Tahsildar Revenue has submitted the Written Instruction furnished by is served on the Counsel Tirupati Urban Mandal dated 08. 02. 2025. Copy of it is taken on record. for the Writ Petitioners as well. This Written Instruction the Official Respondents 3. It is the grievance of the Writ Petitioners that land which are interfering with the peaceful possession of the subject of the learned Counsel purchased by the Writ Petitioners. It is the submission Document No. 701/1994, for the Writ Petitioners that in the year 1994, vide to the vendor of one Sri A. Sidda Reddy sold away some extent of land while being in possession Writ Petitioners. The vendor of the Writ Petitioners, the part of the subject and enjoyment of the said subject land, had sold away extent of land to the Petitioners vide Sale Deed No. 4461/2017, to an date of purchase i. e. square yards. It is further submitted that since the Petitioners have been 31. 07.

2017 (Registered Sale Deed (Ex. P. 1)), the Writ patta land. possession in the said 120 square yards, which is a Assistant Government 4. In the Written Instructions furnished by learned have no objection Pleader, it is stated that the Official Respondents the extent of land, alleged regard to the land situated in Sy. No. 72/3, which is an extent of to have been purchased by the Writ Petitioners, covering that the square yards. It is further stated in the Written Instructions (water body) and which is adjacent to Sy. No. 72/3, is classified as Kaiuva in Sy. No. 69. Since extent of Acs. 3. 98 cents of the water body is situated in Sy. No. 72/3 is contiguous Petitioners’ patta land (120 Square Yards) situated Sy. No. 69, the Petitioners to the land classified as Kaiuva (a water body) in \ , tried to encroach the land in Sy. No. 69 and attempted to raise unauthorized construction.

It is at this stage, the Official Respondents have interfered with the erecting of structures in the land situated in Sy. No. 69. 5. Having regard to the above facts, this Court deems it appropriate to dispose of this Writ Petition, without going into the merit, directing the Official Respondents not to interfere with the peaceful possession of the Petitioners’ land of an extent of 120 Square Yards, which is situated in Sy. No. 72/3 of Thimminaidupalem Village, Tirupati Urban Mandal, Tirupati District. It is, however, clarified that this Court has not passed any Order of Temporary or Permanent Injunction or any Order of Restraint, insofar as the land situated in Sy. No. 69. If there is any dispute with regard to the identification of the property, the Writ Petitioners are free to take steps to approach the Authorities, for seeking survey. 6. With these observations and directions, this Writ Petition stands disposed of. No order as to costs. 7.

Interlocutory Applications, if any, stand closed in terms of this order. Sd/- M. PRABHAKAR RAO ASSISTANT REGISTRAR //TRUE COPY// SECTION OFFICER To, 1. The Principal Secretary, Revenue Dept. , Secretariat, State of Andhra Pradesh, Velagapudi, Guntur. 2. The Collector and District Magistrate, Tirupati District at Tirupati. 3. The Revenue Divisional Officer, Tirupati Division, Tirupati District. 4. The Tahsildar, Tirupati Urban Mandal, Tirupati, Tirupati District. 5. One CC to Sri. Srinivasulu Kurra Advocate [OPUC] 6. Two CCs to GP for Revenue, High Court Of Andhra Pradesh. [OUT] 7. Three CD Copies GSC HIGH COURT DATED:10/02/2025 ORDER WP. No. 3432 of 2025 DISPOSING OF THE WP WITHOUT COSTS

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.