logo

This Product is Licensed to ,

Change Font Style & Size  Show / Hide
24

  •            

 
CDJ 2026 APHC 1066 My Notes print Preview print print
Court : High Court of Andhra Pradesh
Case No : Writ Petition No. 16250 of 2026
Judges: THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE TARLADA RAJASEKHAR RAO
Parties : Ippili Sanyasamma Versus The State of Andhra Pradesh, Rep. By Its Principal Secretary & Others
Appearing Advocates : For the Petitioner: K. Kedharnath Chowdary, Advocate. For the Respondent: Government Pleader for Endowments.
Date of Judgment : 24-06-2026
Head Note :-
Constitution of India - Article 226 -
Judgment :-

(Prayer: 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 of Mandamus declaring actions of the respondents in interfering with my peaceful possession and enjoyment of the property being a house site/plot measuring 72 Sq. Yards or 60.201 Sq. Meters, located in Survey No. 82/2, Plot No. 13 of Southern part, situated at Adivivaram Village, Gopalapatnam Sub-Registry, within the limits of Greater Visakhapatnam Municipal Corporation, without initiating any proceedings as per due process of law, as illegal, arbitrary, and violative of Articles 14 and 21 of Constitution of India and Consequently, direct the Respondents not to interfere with the Petitioner's peaceful possession unless by following the due process of law

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 to direct the respondents not to interfere with my peaceful possession and enjoyment of the property unless by following due process of law)

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

               “…to issue a Writ of Mandamus declaring actions of the respondents in interfering with my peaceful possession and enjoyment of the property being a house site/plot measuring 72 Sq. Yards or 60.201 Sq. Meters, located in Survey No. 82/2, Plot No. 13 of Southern part, situated at Adivivaram Village, Gopalapatnam Sub-Registry, within the limits of Greater Visakhapatnam Municipal Corporation, without initiating any proceedings as per due process of law, as illegal, arbitrary, and violative of Articles 14 and 21 of Constitution of India and Consequently, direct the Respondents not to interfere with the Petitioner's peaceful possession unless by following the due process of law.…”

2. Heard Sri P.Pavan Chowdary, learned counsel, representing Sri K.Kedarnath Chowdary, learned counsel for the petitioner, learned Government Pleader for Endowments appearing on behalf of respondent Nos.1 and 3 and Sri Chintapalli Srinivas, learned counsel for respondent No.2.

3. It is the case of the petitioner that the petitioner is the absolute owner and possessor of the property bearing a house site/plot admeasuring 72 square yards (60.201 square meters), situated in Sy.No.82/2, Plot No.13 of southern part, Adivivaram Village, Gopalapatnam Sub-Registry, within the limits of Greater Visakhapatnam Municipal Corporation.

4. The said property was purchased by the father of the petitioner under a registered sale deed vide Document No.1865/1997, dated 26.06.1997, from his vendors Sri Yalamanchili Apparao and others. Since then, the petitioner’s family has been in peaceful possession and enjoyment of the property.

5. It is the further case of the petitioner that the respondents are trying to evict the petitioners from the above said property without following the procedure as outlined under Section 83 (10) of The Andhra Pradesh Charitable and Hindu Religious Institutions and Endowments Act, 1987 (hereinafter for short ‘Act No.30 of 1987’).

6. Therefore, the present writ petition has been filed seeking a direction to the respondents not to interfere with the petitioner’s peaceful possession and enjoyment of the property without following due process of law.

7. Sri Chintapalli Srinivas, learned counsel for respondent No.2, furnished written instructions across the Bench, which form part of record. The said written instructions outline that the then Inam Commissioner granted Inam Title Deed No.1173 in favour of Devasthanam. Subsequently, after the Inams were abolished, an enquiry under Section 3(3) of the Inams Abolition Act was conducted and declared that the Inam land covered by inam T.D.No.1173 is held by the institution i.e., Sri Varaha Lakshmi Narasimha Vari Devasthanam, Simhachalam. Subsequently, Ryotwari Patta proceedings were initiated under Section 7 of the Inams Abolition Act in A.I.A.C.No.2/96A, dated 14.08.1996, and after due enquiry, a Ryotwari Patta was granted in favour of Devasthanam covering several survey numbers, including the land covered by Sy.No.82/2 to an extent of Ac.1.17 cents.

8. By virtue of the Ryotwari Patta, the Devasthanam is the absolute owner and is in lawful possession of the subject land. Except Devasthanam, no one has any right, title, lawful possession over the land. The said land was already registered under Section 43 of the Act No.30 of 1987 and notified under Section 22(A)(1)(C) of the Registration Act clearly indicating that it is endowed land. By virtue of Section 46(3) of the Act No.30 of 1987, the particulars entered in the approved property register under Section 43 of the Act No.30 of 1987 shall be presumed to be genuine until contrary is proved. Hence, prayed to dismiss the writ petition.

9. A procedure is envisaged under Section 83 (2) of the Act No.30 of 1987 for removal of encroachments. The Executive Officer of the Charitable or Religious Institution or Endowment or the Assistant Commissioner or any authority higher in rank thereof, shall, by notice, require the encroacher to remove the encroachments. The encroacher is also entitled to submit reply/explanation to such notice within one week from the date of receipt of such notice and after submitting such explanation by the encroacher, the authority shall consider and pass appropriate orders.

10. Under Section 83(6) of the Act No.30 of 1987, any person aggrieved by the orders passed by the authority under Section 83(2) of the Act No.30 of 1987, shall have a right of appeal to the Endowments Tribunal within fifteen days from the date of receipt of the said orders. As a procedure has been outlined in Section 83 of the Act No.30 of 1987 for removal of the encroachments, the respondent authority cannot forcibly evict the petitioner from the subject land.

11. Therefore, the present Writ Petition is disposed of at the admission stage, with the consent of both the learned counsel, and relying on the written instructions furnished across the Bench, directing the respondent authorities not to evict the petitioner from the subject property without following the procedure as stipulated under Section 83 of the Act No.30 of 1987. There shall be no order as to costs.

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