SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2025 Supreme(Online)(AP) 18534

HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH
D RAMESH
Annem Sudhakar Reddy – Appellant
Versus
The State of Andhra Pradesh – Respondent
WP 35063/2025



APHC010677212025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI [3208]

(Special Original Jurisdiction)

WEDNESDAY,THE SEVENTEENTH DAY OF DECEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE D RAMESH WRIT PETITION NO: 35063/2025 Between:

1. A NNEM SUDHAKAR REDDY,, S/O.LATE NARAYANA REDDY, AGED ABOUT 54 YEARS, OCC AGRICULTURIST, R/O. YOGIREDDYPALEM VILLAGE, NUZENDLA MANDAL, PALNADU DISTRICT (ERSTWHILE GUNTUR DISTRICT)

2. A NNEM SRINIVAS REDDY, , S/O. LATE NARAYANA REDDY, AGED ABOUT 48 YEARS, OCC GOVT EMPLOYEE, R/O. FLAT NO. 203, VRK APARTMENTS, SBI COLONY, NANDYAL, NANDYEIL DISTRICT

3. A NNEM VEERA REDDY,, S/O. LATE NARAYANA REDDY, AGED ABOUT 56 YEARS, OCC AGRICULTURIST, R/O. YOGIREDDYPALEM VILLAGE, NUZENDLA MANDAL, PALNADU DISTRICT (ERSTWHILE GUNTUR DISTRICT)

...PETITIONER(S)

AND

1. T HE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, REVENUE DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT, VELAGAPUDI, GUNTUR DISTRICT

2. T HE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, PALNADU DISTRICT, NARSARAOPET

3. T HE TAHSILDAR, NUZENDLA MANDAL, PALNADU DISTRICT ...RESPONDENT(S):

Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased tomay be pleased to issue an appropriate writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus, declaring the impugned action of the 3rd respondent in erecting the sign board on 06.12.2025, stating that it is a Government Land trespassers will be prosecuted in the petitioners land admeasuring Ac 3.03 cents in Sy.No. 5/1-2 of Mukellapadu Village, Nuzendla Mandal, Palnadu District and further action in preventing the petitioners from transplantation of the paddy though petitioners are absolute owners/possessors of the land for decades with the title traceable to the registered sale deeds and revenue records as illegal, arbitrary. Violative of Article 14, 19, 21and 300-A of The Constitution of India and consequently direct the 3rd respondent and his subordinates not to interfere with the peaceful possession and enjoyment of the petitioners aforesaid land with a further direction to remove the sign board erected illegally and pass such IA 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 may be pleased to direct the 3rd respondent and his subordinates not to interfere with the peaceful possession and enjoyment of the petitioner’s land admeasuring Ac 3.03 cents in Sy.No. 5/1-2 of Mukellapadu Village, Nuzendla Mandal, Palnadu District including the replantation of paddy in petitioner’s land, pending disposal of the above Writ petition, and pass such Counsel for the Petitioner(S): 1. K RATHANGA PANI REDDY Counsel for the Respondent(S):

1. GP FOR REVENUE The Court made the following ORDER:

This Writ Petition, under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, is filed seeking the following relief:

“…..to issue an appropriate writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus, declaring the impugned action of the 3rd respondent in erecting the sign board on 06.12.2025, stating that it is a Government Land trespassers will be prosecuted in the petitioners land admeasuring Ac 3.03 cents in Sy.No. 5/1-2 of Mukellapadu Village, Nuzendla Mandal, Palnadu District and further action in preventing the petitioners from transplantation of the paddy though petitioners are absolute owners/possessors of the land for decades with the title traceable to the registered sale deeds and revenue records as illegal, arbitrary. Violative of Article 14, 19, 21 and 300-A of the Constitution of India and consequently direct the 3rd respondent and his subordinates not to interfere with the peaceful possession and enjoyment of the petitioners aforesaid land with a further direction to remove the sign board erected illegally...”

2. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned Assistant Government

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top