ORDER

The writ petition is filed complaining the high handed action on the part of respondents in interfering with the petitioner‟s possession and enjoyment in respect of Ac.1.25 cents in R.S.No.34/10 of Kurnool without following due process of law, as illegal and arbitrary.

2. In the affidavit, it was contended that petitioner‟s father has been in possession and enjoyment of an extent of Ac.1.25 cents since long time till his death in the year 2009. Later, the petitioner came into possession and has been cultivating the land by raising rain fed crops. The respondents 2 and 5 without issuing any notice are trying to dispossess the petitioner from the land and hence, the writ petition is filed.

3. Heard Sri Ch.B.R.P.Sekhar, learned counsel for petitioner and Sri Suresh Kumar Reddy Kalava, learned Standing Counsel for 2nd respondent and learned Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue for respondents 3 to 5.

4. The adangal report dated 22.09.2023 filed along with writ petition would disclose that the petitioner is in possession and enjoyment of Ac.1.25 cents in S.No.34/10 and the possession of petitioner is shown as „encroacher‟.

5. Learned standing counsel for 2nd respondent, on instructions would submit that S.No.34/10 is in Handri River as per Resettlement Register of Kurnool and the 2nd respondent will follow due process to evict the petitioner.

6. The Full Bench of the Allahabad High Court in Yar Muhammad and Ors. Vs. Lakshmi Das and Ors.1, held thus:

“Law respects possession even if there is no title to support it. It will not permit any person to take the law in his own hands and to dispossess a person in actual possession without having recourse to a court. No person can be allowed to become a judge in his own cause.”

7. In Rame Gowda Vs. M. Varadappa Naidu2 , the Hon‟ble Apex Court held thus:

8. It is thus clear that so far as the Indian law is concerned, the person in peaceful possession is entitled to retain his possession and in order to protect such possession he may even use reasonable force to keep out a trespasser. A rightful owner who has been wrongfully dispossessed of land may retake possession if he can do so peacefully and without the use of unreasonable force. If the trespasser is in settled possession of the property belonging to the rightful owner, the rightful owner shall have to take recourse to law; he cannot take the law in his own hands and evict the trespasser or interfere with his possession. The law will come to the aid of a person in peaceful and settled possession by injuncting even a rightful owner from using force or taking the law in his own hands, and also by restoring him in possession even from the rightful owner (of course subject to the law of limitation), if the latter has dispossessed the prior possessor by use of force … …”

8. In view of above settled proposition of law, without going into other aspects, in view of the adangal report dated

1 AIR 1959 All 1

2 (2004) 1 SCC 769

22.09.2023 filed along with writ petition, wherein the name of petitioner is shown against Ac.1.25 cents in S.No.34/10 as „encroacher‟, the respondents shall not interfere with the petitioner‟s possession in respect of subject property except by following due process of law.

9. Accordingly, the Writ Petition is disposed of. No costs.

As a sequel, pending miscellaneous petitions, if any, shall stand closed.

________________________________ JUSTICE SUBBA REDDY SATTI

8th November, 2023 PVD