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

2026 Supreme(Online)(AP) 20168

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI
Tarlada Rajasekhar Rao, J
Sunkara Krishna Reddy – Appellant
Versus
The State of Andhra Pradesh – Respondent
WRIT PETITION NO: 10936/2026



Advocates:
For the Appellants/Petitioners: Sodum Anvesha, Mocherla Deepak Bhargavaram
For the Respondents: GP for Revenue, Shaik Khaja Basha

Eviction of persons from property claimed by the Waqf Board must be conducted in accordance with the due process of law as prescribed under Section 54 of the Waqf Act, 1995.

Headnote:The petitioners approached the court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, challenging the respondents' attempts to dispossess them from land in Bit 1 Village, Nellore Mandal, claiming such actions were contrary to the Waqf Act, 1995 and violative of Articles 14, 19(1)(g), 21, and 300-A of the Constitution of India. The petitioners claimed possession since 1995 based on a sale agreement, while the respondents asserted the land was notified as Waqf property in 1963. The primary issue was whether the respondents could summarily dispossess the petitioners from the subject property. The court observed that under Section 54 of the Waqf Act, 1995, any eviction must be carried out by following the due process of law. The petition was disposed of directing the respondents to follow due process of law before evicting the petitioners.

Table of Content
1. the parties' competing claims over land possession and its status as waqf property. (Para 1 , 2 , 3 , 4)
2. the statutory requirement under section 54 of the waqf act, 1995 to follow due process for eviction. (Para 5)
3. judicial direction to ensure legal procedure is followed before dispossession. (Para 6)

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 an appropriate Writ, Order, or Direction, preferably one in the nature of a Writ of Mandamus, declaring the action of Respondents in taking steps to dispossess the Petitioners with respect to land admeasuring an extent of Ac. 1.50 Cents and Ac. 1.35 Cents respectively in Sy.Nos 31,32/A,33,34 and 62 in Bit 1 Village, Nellore Mandal, Sri Potti Sriramulu Nellore District being contrary to the Waqf Act, 1995 as arbitrary, illegal, unwarranted, constitutional, unsustainable and violative of Articles 14, 19(1)(g), 21, and 300-A of the Constitution of India and consequently direct the Respondents not dispossess the Petitioners from the subject property without following due process of law and pass such

IA NO: 1 OF 2026

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 Respondents not to dispossess the Petitioners with respect to land admeasuring an extent of Ac. 1.50 Cents and Ac. 1.35 Cents respectively in Sy.Nos 31,32/A,33,34 and 62 in Bit-1 Village, Nellore Mandal, Sri Potti Sriramulu Nellore District and to pass such

The Court made the following:

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE TARLADA RAJASEKHAR RAO

WRIT PETITION No.10936 of 2026

ORDER:-

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

“…to issue an appropriate Writ, Order, or Direction, preferably one in the nature of a Writ of Mandamus, declaring the action of Respondents in taking steps to dispossess the Petitioners with respect to land admeasuring an extent of Ac.1.50 Cents and Ac.1.35 Cents respectively in Sy.Nos.31,32/A,33,34 and 62 in Bit 1 Village, Nellore Mandal, Sri Potti Sriramulu Nellore District being contrary to the Waqf Act, 1995 as arbitrary, illegal, unwarranted, constitutional, unsustainable and violative of Articles 14, 19(1)(g), 21, and 300-A of the Constitution of India and consequently direct the Respondents not dispossess the Petitioners from the subject property without following due process of law and pass such other order in the interest of justice.…”

2. Heard Sri Mocherla Deepak Bhargavaram, learned counsel for the petitioners, Sri Shaik Khaja Basha, learned counsel for respondent No.2 and learned Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue for respondent Nos.3 to 5.

3. It is the case of the petitioners that the petitioners entered an agreement of sale with their vendors on 15.10.1995. Since then, the petitioners are in possession of the property. The respondents are trying to dispossess the petitioners from the subject land.

4. Learned counsel for respondent No.2 would submit that property belongs to Waqf Board and the same was notified in the A.P.Gazette No.18-A dated 02.05.1963.

5. Under Section 54 of the Waqf Act, 1995, the respondents should evict the petitioners by following due process of law.

6. Therefore, with the consent of both the learned counsel, the present Writ Petition is disposed of at the admission stage, directing the respondents to follow due process of law before evicting the petitioners. There shall be no order as to costs.

As a sequel thereto, interlocutory applications pending if any, shall stand closed.

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