LAWS(APH)-2020-11-72

SEPENA GOVINDA RAO Vs. STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH

Decided On November 10, 2020
Sepena Govinda Rao Appellant
V/S
STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner, a resident of Thotawada Village, Burja Mandal of Srikakulam District, is requesting the relief in the nature of Writ of Mandamus, questioning the action of the respondents in insisting him to vacate the land claimed by him of Ac.0-04 cents in S.No.261 of Thotawada Revenue Village and further questions the action of the 3rd respondent in constructing a Village Secretariat in the above land. Thus, he states that the action of the 3rd respondent violates Articles 14,21 and 300-A of the Constitution of India.

(2.) The petitioner claimed that his father Sri Suryanarayana was granted a D-form patta for the above Ac.0-04 cents in S.No.261 of Thotawada village, on 04.11.1988 and that his father died about 30 years ago intestate. Thus, he claimed that he succeeded to the above plot and that he has been in peaceful possession and enjoyment of the same without interference from anyone. He complained that, taking advantage of location of the office of the 3rd respondent by the side of this plot, in order to extend its office premises, there was an attempted interference with his peaceful possession and enjoyment of this plot.

(3.) The petitioner further stated that he laid a suit in O.S.No.8 of 2020 on the file of the Court of the learned Junior Civil Judge, Amadalavasala, for grant of the relief of permanent injunction against the 3rd respondent and others, where he sought a temporary injunction in I.A.No.30 of 2020 against the respondents and others. However, on account of the present Covid situation, the suit could not be pursued, which, ultimately, he had to withdraw, filing a memo, dated 29.05.2020. The petitioner further claimed that the respondents cannot resort to any action against him without pursuing land acquisition proceedings and without issuing any notice for resumption of this land. Thus, the petitioner claimed that he cannot be evicted from the land in dispute without due process of law, since he being in settled possession of this plot. Thus stating, the petitioner requested to grant relief in his favour.