IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH :: AMARAVATI ^ (Special Original Jurisdiction) THURSDAY. THE EIGHTH DAY OF MAY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE VENKATESWARLU NIMMAGADDA WRIT PETITION NO: 12854 OF 2025 Between: 1. Sri Moravaneni Mastan Naidu, S/o. Tirupataiah, aged 64 years, Occ Farmer, R/o.lnugunta Village, Ozili Mandal, Tirupathi District, (earlier SPSR Nellore District) 2. Smt. Moravaneni Sumathamma @ Sumathi, W/o. Mastan Naidu, aged 55 years, Occ Farmer.R/o.lnugunta Village, Ozili Mandal, Tirupathi District, (earlier SPSR Nellore District) ...Petitioners AND 1. The State of Andhra Pradesh, Represented by its Principal Secretary, Revenue Department, Secretariat, Velagapudi, Guntur District. 2. The District Collector, Tirupati District (earlier SPSR Nellore District). 3. The Revenue Divisional Officer, Tirupati District (earlier SPSR Nellore District). 4. The Tahsildar, Ozili Mandal, Tirupati District, (earlier SPSR Nellore District). ...Respondents ^ 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 the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the 4th respondent in issuing illegal eviction notice vide Proceedings R.C. B.44/2025 dated 22.02.2025 issued under Section 7 of the Madras Land Encroachment Act, 1905, pertaining to the lands of the petitioners admeasuring Ac. 2.50 cents and Ac. 2.50 cents in Survey No. 67-P, Inugunta Village, Ozili Mandal, Tirupati District (earlier SPSR Nellore District), as illegal, arbitrary, ultra vires of the provisions of the Madras Land Encroachment Act, 1905, without jurisdiction, violative of provisions of the Andhra Pradesh Assigned Lands (Prohibition of Transfers) Act, 1977 (Act 9 of 1977) and unconstitutional, being violative of Articles 14, 19(1 )(f) and 21 of the Constitution of India and consequently direct the respondents particularly the 4th respondent, not to interfere with the possession of the petitioners' lands admeasuring Ac. 2.50 cents and Ac. 2.50 cents in Survey No. 67-P, Inugunta Village, Ozili Mandal, Tirupati District, Earlier SPSR Nellore District in pursuance of illegal eviction notices vide R.C.B.44/2025 dated 22.02.2025 issued under Section 7 of the Madras Land Encroachment Act, 1905. more / lA NO: 1 OF 2025 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 4th respondent not to interfere with the possession of the petitioners' lands admeasuring Ac. 2.50 cents and Ac. 2.50 cents in Survey No. 67-P, Inugunta Village. Ozili Mandal, Tirupati District (earlier SPSR Nellore District), pending disposal of the writ petition. z' Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI. RAMESH BABU TALLURI Counsel for the Respondents: GP FOR REVENUE The Court made the following order: APHC010245132025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3329] V— THURSDAY ,THE EIGHTH DAY OF MAY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE VENKATESWARLU NIMMAGADDA WRIT PETITION NO: 12854/2025 Between: ...PETITIONER{S) Sro Moravaneni Mastan Naidu and Others AND ...RESPONDENT(S) The State Of Andhra Pradesh and Others Counsel for the Petitioner{S): 1.RAMESH BABU TALLURI Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1.GP FOR REVENUE The Court made the following: 2 NV,J W. P. NO. 12854 OF 2025 THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE VENKATESWARLU NIMMAGADDA WRIT PETITION NO: 12854/2025 ORDER:- The present writ petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking following relief; “to issue a writ order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the 4*^ respondent in issuing illegal eviction notice vide Proceedings R.C.B.44/2025 dated 22.02.2025 issued under Section 7 of the Madras Land Encroachment Act, 1905 pertaining to the lands of the petitioners admeasuring Ac.2-50 cents and Ac.2-50 cents in Survey No.67-P, Inugunta Village, Ozili Mandal, Tirupati District (earlier SPSR Nellore District) as illegal, arbitrary, ultra vires of the provisions of the Madras Land Encroachment Act, 1905, without jurisdiction, violative of provisions of the Andhra Pradesh Assigned Lands (Prohibition of Transfers) Act, 1977 (Act 9 of 1977) and unconstitutional, being violative of Articles 14, 19(1) (f) and 21 of the Constitution of India and consequently direct the respondents more particularly the 4‘^ respondent not to interfere with the possession of the petitioners lands admeasuring Ac.2-50 cents and Ac.2-50 cents in Survey No.67-P, Inugunta Village, Ozili Mandal, Tirupati District, Earlier SPSR Nellore District in pursuance of illegal eviction notices vide R.C.B.44/2025 dated 22.02.2025 issued under Section 7 of the Madras Land Encroachment Act, 1905 and to pass...”(/n verbatim) Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned Government Pleader for Revenue for the respondents. The claim of the petitioners is that they are the absolute owners and possessors of the land admeasuring Ac.2-50 cents each in Sy.No.67-P, Inugunta Village, Ozili Mandal, Tirupati District(SPSR Nellore District) and the said land was assigned to them through a D-Form Patta (Darkhast) in 1979 by the competent authority under the A.P Land Grant Rules, 1969, since then 2. 3. 3 NV' W.P. NO. 12854 OF 20'^ possession of the they have been in continuous uninterrupted and peaceful subject land. While the matter stood thus issued under Section 7 of Madras Act 03 of 1905 (for short petitioners. a notice dated 22.02.2025 was the Act”) to the 4. The main contention of the petitioners is that the petitioners are in iong possession and enjoyment of the property. The petitioners dispossessed by exercising power under Section 7 of the Madras the petitioners are in settled cannot be Act. When possession of the property, the remedy open to the respondents is to approach the Civil Court in view of the guidelines issued by the Apex Court in "Government of Andhra Pradesh V. Thummala Krishna Rao^ . instead of approaching the Civil Court to establish the title by respondent No.4, he issued notice under Section 7 of the Madras Act, land, requested invoking summary procedure to evict the petitioners from the to allow the writ petition. 5. Learned Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue notice dated 22.02.2025 was issued under Section 7 of the submitted that a Madras Act 03 of 1905, the said initiation of proceedings under Madras Act is without jurisdiction and requested to pass appropriate orders. 6. In fact, the A.P.Land Encroachment Act is in force, but instead of following the procedure contemplated under the A.P.Land but a notice was issued under the Madras Act Encroachment Act 03 of 1905, which is not AIR 1982 SC 1081 4 NVJ W.P. NO. 12854 OF 2025 applicable within the territory of Andhra Pradesh. Therefore, a notice under Madras Act is without jurisdiction and cannot be enforced in view of the new enactment of A.P. Land Encroachment Act. On perusal of the impugned notice, it is clear that no specific date and time is fixed for submitting explanation in terms of Section 7 of the Madras Encroachment Act, hence, notice is incomplete. On this ground also the petition is liable to be allowed by setting aside the notice dated 22.02.2025. However, when the petitioners are in settled possession and enjoyment of the property, it is the obligation of the State to approach the competent Civil Court and obtain relief for eviction of the petitioners or removal of objectionable encroachments. This view is fortified by the judgment of the Apex Court in “Government of Andhra Pradesh v. Thummala Krishna Rao” (referred supra). In the said judgment, the Apex Court candidly held that the Government, in summary proceedings, cannot unilaterally decide its own title over the property, and their remedy is only to approach the competent Civil Court seeking declaration of title. 7. 8. If the said principle is applied to the present facts of the case, remedy open to respondent No.4 is to approach the competent Civil Court to establish 9. the title and for recovery of the possession. Hence, the respondents are at liberty to take appropriate action in terms of judgment of the Apex Court in “Government of Andhra Pradesh v. Thummala Krishna Rao” (referred supra). Therefore, the petitioners cannot be dispossessed, except by following 5 NV^ W.P.N0.12854 OF20^^ the law laid down by the Apex Court in “Government of Andhra Pradesh v. Thummala Krishna Rao” (referred supra) and L.Rs. V. M.Varadappa Naidu (Dead) by L.Rs.^” With the above direction, the writ petition is allowed. No costs. Consequently, miscellaneous applications pending if Rame Gowda (dead) by 10. any, shall stand closed. '^^^TANT^GISTRAR ^SECTION OFFfCER //TRUE COPY// To. 1. The Principal Secretary, Revenue Department, State of Andhra Pradesh, Secretariat, Velagapudi, Guntur District. 2. The District Collector, Tirupati District (earlier SPSR Nellore District). 3. The Revenue Divisional Officer, Tirupati District (earlier SPSR Nellore District). 4. The TahsiJdar, Ozili Mandal, Tirupati District, (earlier SPSR Nellore District). 5. One CC to Sri. Ramesh Babu Talluri Advocate [OPUC] 6. Two CCs to GP for Revenue, High Court Of Andhra Pradesh. [OUT] 7. Three CD Copies GSC ^ 2004 (1) see 769 HIGH COURT DATED:08/05/2025 ORDER WP.No.12854of 2025 ALLOWING THE WP WITHOUT COSTS