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) 19429

HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH
TARLADA RAJASEKHAR RAO
BERUSUNTI KANTHAMMA – Appellant
Versus
THE STATE OF AP – Respondent
WP 22135/2023



APHC010428222023 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI [3330]

(Special Original Jurisdiction)

FRIDAY, THE TWELFTH DAY OF DECEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE TARLADA RAJASEKHAR RAO WRIT PETITION No.22135 of 2023 Between:

1. BERUSUNTI KANTHAMMA, W/O.B.SAMUEL, AGED ABOUT 72 YEARS, OCC. HOUSE WIFE, R/O. DOOR NO.11/535-20, YANADI COLONY, KOTHAPALLEPANCHAYATH, PRODDATURMANDAL, Y.S.R.DISTRICT.

2. BERUSUNTISTEVEEN,, S/O.B.SAMUEL, AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS, R/O. DOOR NO.11/535-20, YANADI COLONY, KOTHAPALLEPANCHAYATH, PRODDATURMANDAL, Y.S.R.DISTRICT. ...PETITIONER(S)

AND

1. THE STATE OF AP, REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE, SECRETARIAT. BUILDINGS, VELAGAPUDI, GUNTUR DISTRICT.

2. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, , Y.S.R DISTRICT, KADAPA.

3. THE TAHSILDAR, PRODDATURMANDAL, Y.S.R.DISTRICT.

4. THE STATION HOUSE OFFICER, TALUKA POLICE STATION, PRODDATUR, Y.S.R.DISTRICT.

5. MESA SARA, , W/O. M.RAJ KUMAR, AGED ABOUT 36 YEARS, R/O. DOOR NO.11/540, YANADI COLONY, KOTHAPALLEPANCHAYATH, PRODDATURMANDAL, Y.S.R.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 to issue a writ, order or direction more particularly one in nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the highhanded action on the part of the respondent no.3 in interfering with our rights over the house site in an extent of 4 cents with Door No.11/535-20 and 21 in Sy.No.173/2 of Moddameedipalle , Yanadi colony, KothapallePanchayath, ProddaturMandal, Y.S.R.district and trying to cancel the possession certificate which was issued in our favor and trying to assign the same in favor of respondent No.5 and the. consequential action of the respondent No.4 in threathning us to vacate the subject house property without following due process of law, as arbitrary, illegal, colorable exercise of power, apart from being voilative of fundamental rights guaranteed to us under Articles 14, 19 and 21 of the Constitution of India and consequently direct the respondents No.3 and 4 not to interfere with our rights over the house in an extent of 4 cents with Door No.11/535-20 and 21 in Sy.No.173/2 of Moddameedipalle , Yanadi colony, KothapallePanchayath, ProddaturMandal, Y.S.R.district and not to assingn the same in favor of third parties or respondent No.5 without following due process of law.

Counsel for the Petitioner(S):

1. P V N KIRAN KUMAR Counsel for the Respondent(S):

1. GP FOR HOME

2. GP FOR REVENUE The Court made the following:

ORDER:

The present Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking the following relief:

“…to issue a writ, order or direction more particularly one in nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the highhanded action on the part of the respondent no.3 in interfering with our rights over the house site in an extent of 4 cents with Door No.11/535-20 and 21 in Sy.No.173/2 of Moddameedipalle, Yanadi colony, Kothapalle Panchayath, Proddatur Mandal, Y.S.R.district and trying to cancel the possession certificate which was issued in our favor and trying to assign the same in favor of respondent No.5 and the. consequential action of the respondent No.4 in threatening us to vacate the subject house property without following due process of law, as arbitrary, illegal, colorable exercise of power, apart from being voilative of fundamental rights guaranteed to us under Articles 14, 19 and 21 of the Constitution of India and consequently direct the respondents No.3 and 4 not to interfere with our rights over the house in an extent of 4 cents with Door No.11/535-20 and 21 in Sy.No.173/2 of Moddameedipalle, Yanadi colony, Kothapalle Panchayath, Proddatur Mandal, Y.S.R.district and not to assign the same in favor of third parties or respondent No.5 without following due process of law and pass such other order or orders ….”

2. It is the pleading of the petitioners that a person in settled possession

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