LANKALAPALLI ATCHAYAMMA vs THE STATE OF AP

APHC010066672023 IN TH THURSDA TWO THE HONOURA W Between: 1.

LANKALAPALLI AT 69 YEARS, HOUSE MANDAL,VIZIANAG 1.

THE STATE OF PANCHAYAT RAJ SECRETARIAT BU 2.

DISTRICT PANCH VIZIANAGARAM.

3.

MANDAL PARISHA MANDAL, VIZIANAG 4.

THE NADIPALLI G SECRETARY, NAD VIZIANAGARAM DI OF THIS COURT 02/2023.

Petition under Articl circumstances stated in pleased to issue a writ, o mandamus, declaring the E HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRAD AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) AY,THE SIXTH DAY OF NOVEMBER THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT ABLE SRI JUSTICE RAVI CHEEMAL RIT PETITION NO: 3291/2023 TCHAYAMMA, W/O VENKATA RAO, EWIFE, R/OF NADIPALLI (VIL.), PO GARAM DISTRICT.

AND AP, REP.

BY ITS PRINCIPAL AND RURAL DEVELOPMENT D ILDINGS, VELAGAPUDI, GUNTUR D HAYAT OFFICER, VIZIANAGARA AD DEVELOPMENT OFFICER, POO GARAM DISTRICT.

GRAM PANCHAYAT, REP BY ITS DIPALLI VILLAGE, POOSAPATIRE ISTRICT.

R4 IS IMPLEADED AS PER DT 21/02/2023 VIDE ORDER PA ...RES le 226 of the Constitution of India pra the affidavit filed therewith, the High order or direction, more particularly a w e high-handed and arbitrary action of t DESH [3332] R LAPATI HINDU, AGED OOSPATIREGA ...PETITIONER SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT, DISTRICT.

AM DISTRICT, OSAPATIREGA PANCHAYAT EGA MANDAL, R THE ORDER ASSED IN IA SPONDENT(S): aying that in the h Court may be writ in the nature the respondents in interfering with the possession and enjoyment of the Petitioner of an extent of Ac.0.50 Cents in Survey No.

10-36 in Nadipalli village and trying to dispossess the Petitioners by demolishing the structures therein without following due process of law, as illegal, arbitrary, without jurisdiction, and consequently, direct the respondents to forbear from interfering in any manner with the possession of the Petitioner of an extent of Ac.0.50 Cents in Survey No.

Survey No.

10-36 in Nadipalli village, Poospatirega Mandal, Vizianagaram District and pass IA NO: 1 OF 2023 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 respondents not to interfere with the possession and enjoyment of the Petitioner vacant site of an extent of Ac.0.50 Cents in Survey No.

10-36 in Nadipalli village, Poospatirega Mandal, Vizianagaram District pending disposal of the above Writ Petition and pass IA NO: 2 OF 2023 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 implead The Nadipalli Gram Panchayat, rep.by its Panchayat Secretary, Nadipalli Village, Poosapatirega Mandal, Vizianagaram District. as party Respondent No.4 to this writ petition and pass Counsel for the Petitioner: 1.M BALASUBRAHMANYAM Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1.GP FOR PANCHAYAT RAJ RURAL DEV 2.N SRIHARI (Standing Counsel for ZPP MPP and GRAM PANCHAYAT) The Court made the following: ORDER: Declaring the highhanded action of the respondents in interfering with the possession and enjoyment of the petitioner’s land to an extent of Ac.0.50 cents in Sy.No.10-36 in Nadipalli Village and trying to dispossess her by demolishing the structures therein without following due process of law, as illegal, arbitrary, the present writ petition is filed.

2.

Heard Sri M.Bala Subrahmanyam, learned counsel for the petitioner, Sri Y.Koteswara Rao, learned Standing Counsel for Gram Panchayat and Smt.Naga Chandrika, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Panchayat Raj for the respondents.

Learned Standing Counsel on counter contended that the respondents never interfered with the subject property of the petitioner. etitioner.

The Gram Panchayat neither issued notice nor tried to dispossess the petitioner in any way and the writ petition has been filed on mere apprehension, accordingly, prayed to dismiss the writ petition.

4.

In reply, learned counsel for the petitioner prayed to record the said submission and close the writ petition.

5.

Perused the record and considered the submissions made by the learned counsel.

6.

Assailing the action of the respondents in interfering with the possession of the petitioner over the subject property, the present writ petition is filed.

A perusal of the counter would indicate that the Gram Panchayat never interfered with the possession of the petitioner or tried to dispossess her from the subject property.

In view of the same, there remains nothing for adjudication and the writ petition is liable to be closed.

7.

Accordingly, the Writ Petition is closed.

The respondents are directed not to interfere with the petitioner’s subject property.

In the event if they want to interfere, it is needless to observe that they have to follow due process of law.

There shall be no order as to costs.

As a sequel, miscellaneous applications, pending if any, shall stand closed. _____________________________ JUSTICE RAVI CHEEMALAPATI Date: 06th November, 2025 RKS