APHC010180192025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3329] TUESDAY, THE EIGHTH DAY OF APRIL TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE VENKATESWARLU NIMMAGADDA WRIT PETITION NO: 9181/2025 Between: G. Prathap Reddy ...Petitioner AND The State of Andhra Pradesh and others ...Respondents Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. G. M. Swamulu Counsel for the Respondents: 1. GP for Revenue The Court made the following: THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE VENKATESWARLU NIMMAGADDA WRIT PETITION NO: 9181/2025 1. This Writ Petition has been filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India to issue a Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the 4th respondent in issuing the eviction notice vide Roc.B/106/2025 dated 01.04.2025 as illegal, arbitrary and violative of Articles 14, 21 and 300-A of the Constitution of India. 2. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Government Pleader for Revenue for the respondents. 3. The case of the petitioner is that the petitioners is in the possession and enjoyment of the property in question to an extent of Ac.0-13 cents in Sy.No.1305/1 of Chandragiri Village & Mandal, Tirupati District, arising out of the land to an extent of Ac.6-06 cents. Having long standing possession over the subject property, the petitioner got constructed RCC house shed and the same was assessed by the Dornakambala Gram Panchayat and also issued property tax receipts to that effect, admitting/confirming the petitioner is in the possession of the subject house property. While so, without issuing any notice under Section 7 of the A.P. Land Encroachment Act, 1905 (in short, the Act 1905), or under the provisions of the Panchayat Raj Act, 1994, the respondent No.4 straightaway issued a notice of eviction under Section 6 of the Act, 1905, contrary to the procedure contemplated under the provisions of the A.P. Land Encroachment Act, 1905. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner also submits that, it is settled proposition of law that once the petitioner was identified in possession of the Government land or any Government Poramboke land, the respondents shall adhere to observe principles of natural justice by way of issuing a show cause notice and call for explanation and thereafter they are entitled to pass an order for eviction. In the instant case, there is no such notice of show cause calling explanation from the petitioner. Therefore, the notice dated 01.04.2025 issued under Section 6 of the Act, 1905 is liable to be set-aside. 5. On the other hand, learned Government Pleader for Revenue submits that the subject land is classified as water body or vanka. Therefore, in view of the rulings laid down by the Hon’ble Apex Court as well as this Court, the petitioner cannot be allowed to encroach the land classified as water body or river courses, vanka etc, pursuant to which the petitioner was issued a notice under Section 6 of the Act, 1905, appears to be not preceded by any show cause notice. He further submits that, since there is no clarification regarding show cause notice, the present notice issued under Section 6 of the Act, 1905, can be treated as show cause notice and let there be an explanation to the said notice to be submitted by the petitioner, which would be considered by Respondent No.4 and would pass appropriate orders in accordance with law. 6. Having regard to the submissions made by learned counsel for the parties and perused the material available on record, it is observed that the said impugned notice dated 01.04.2025 issued under Section 6 of the Act, 1905 without preceding any show cause notice is contrary to law. However, pursuant to the submission made by learned Government Pleader for Revenue, the said impugned notice should be treated as show cause notice issued under the A.P. Land Encroachment Act, 1905. 7. Therefore, the petitioner is hereby directed to submit detailed explanation along with all the documents, title deed of the possession over the subject property within a period of three (03) weeks from the date of receipt of copy of this order. Upon submission, the respondent No.4 shall consider the same and pass appropriate orders by providing an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner and other stakeholders if any, within a reasonable time. In the meanwhile, the respondents are directed not to interfere with the peaceful possession and enjoyment of the property of the petitioner. 8. With the above directions, this Writ Petition is disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs. 9. As a sequel, miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending shall stand closed. 10. With the above direction, writ petition is disposed of. No costs. 11. Consequently, miscellaneous applications pending if any, shall stand closed. _________________________________ VENKATESWARLU NIMMAGADDA, J 08.04.2025 kbs 139 HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE VENKATESWARLU NIMMAGADDA W.P.No.9181 of 2025 Dt: 08.04.2025 kbs