IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH :: AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) THURSDAY, THE FIFTEENTH DAY OF MAY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE K SURESH REDDY WRIT PETITION NO: 13409 OF 2025 Between; Dontukurthi Savithri, W/o Late DVSSS Charyulu Aged 65 years, Occ. Housewife, R/o HNO. 3-299, Kothasunkarapalem village, H/o Kantakapalli Village, Kothavalasa Mandal, Vizianagaram District. ...Petitioners :and 1. State of Andhra Pradesh, R^. by its PrI. Secretary to Govt., Revenue Department, Secretariat, Velagapudi, Guntur. 2. District Collector, Vizianagaram District at Vizianagaram. 3. Revenue Divisional Officer, Vizianagaram Urban Division. 4. Tahsildar, Kothavalasa Mandal, Vizianagaram District. ...Respondents Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the.affi^avit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased to issue a appropriate writ. Order or direction, particularly a WRIT OF MANDAMUS declaring the order of the 4th respondent in Rc.Non.138/2025/SA/Dt. 05.2025 dated 07.05.2025, under section 6 of AP Land Encroachment Act, 1905 in a cyclostat format of section 7 notice without there being any reasoning on the explanation of the petitioner dated 27.03.2025, as illegal irregular, irrational, arbitrary, violative of principles of natural justice and Articles 14 and 21 of Constitution of India and consequently suspend the order of the 4th respondent in Rc.Non.138/2025/SA/Dt. 05.2025.dated 07.05.2025. IA 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 suspend the order of the 4th respondent in Rc.Non.138/2025/SA/Dt. 05.2025 dated 07.05.2025 passed under section 6 of AP Land Encroachment Act, 1905 pending disposal of the above writ petition. Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI M SOLOMON RAJU Counsel for the Respondents No.1 to 4: GP FOR REVENUE The Court made the following ORDER: APHC010273962025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3239] THURSDAY, THE FIFTEENTH DAY OF MAY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE K SURESH REDDY WRIT PETITION NO: 13409/2025 Between: 1 Dontukurthi Savithri ...PETITIONER ) AND I State Of Andhra Pradesh and Others ...RESPONDENT(S) Counsel for the Petitioner: 1.M SOLOMON RAJU Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1.GP FOR REVENUE The Court made the following order: When the matter is taken up for admission, the learned counsel for the writ petitioner as well as the learned Government Pleader for Revenue conjointly submit that the present Writ Petition is squarely covered by the Orders dated 09.05.2025 passed by this Court, in W.P.Nos. 13341, 13347 & 13349 of 2025 and requested this Court to dispose of the presentWrit Petition also in terms of the above said orders. T 2 Accordingly, recording the above said submission, the present Writ Petition is also disposed of at the stage of admission, in terms of the 2. Orders dated 09.05.2025 passed by this Court, in W.P.Nos.13341, 13347 & \ 13349 of 2025. There shall be no order as to costs. 3. Registry is directed to append the copy of the Orders dated 09.05.2025 passed by this Court, in W.P.Nos.13341, 13347 & 13349 of 2025 along with this order. As a sequel miscellaneous application, pending, if any, shall also stand closed. Sd/- M PRABHAKAR RAO ASSISTANT REGISTRAR / //TRUE COPY// SECTION OFFICER To, 1. The State Secretary to Govt., of Andhra Pradesh, Revenue Department, Secretariat, Velagapudi, Guntur 2. The District Collector, Vizianagaram District at Vizianagaram Divisional Officer, Vizianagaram Urban Division 4. The Tahsildar, Kothavalasa Mandal, Vizianagaram District 3. The Revenue 5. One CC to SRI M SOLOMON RAJU Advocate [OPUC] REVENUE, High Court of Andhra Pradesh [OUT] 6. Two CCs to GP FOR 7. Three CD Copies TAG in WP. No. 13341, 13347 & (Along with Copy of orders dated 09.05.2025 in 13349 of 2025) APHC010268042025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3329] FRIDAY ,THE NINTH DAY OF MAY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE VENKATESWARLU NIMMAGADDA WRIT PETITION NO: 13341 OF 2025 Between: ...PETITIONER Pediredla Suryanarayana Pathrudu '' AND ...RESPONDENT(S) The State Of Ap and Others Counsel for the Petitioner: 1.M SOLOMON RAJU Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1.GP FOR REVENUE The Court made the following: the honourable SRI JUSTICE VENKATESWARLU WRIT PETITION NO: 13341 OF 907*^ NIMMAGADDA ORDER:- The present Writ Petition is filed respondent in Rc.No.138/2025/SA/Dt. Section 6 of A.P.Land Encroachment questioning the order of the 05.2025, dated 07.05.2025 Act, 1905 in under a cyclostat format of any reasoning on the explanation of the as illegal and arbitrary. Section 7 notice without there being petitioner, dated 27.03.2025 2. Heard Sri M. Solomon Raju, learned learned Government Pleader. Revenue for the counsel for the petitioner and Respondents. 3. Learned counsel for the respondent issued the i petitioner would contend that the 4**^ impugned notice dated 07.05.2025 directing the in,respect of the land to an extent of Village, Kothavalasa petitioner to submit written explanation i Ac. 0.78 cents in Sy.No.142 of Kantakapalli Revenue Mandal, Vizianagaram District. Pursuant to the said notice, submitted his written explanation dated 27.03.2025 the petitioner requesting to consider the evict him from the possession of the same and no coercive steps be taken to subject property. As there i subject property, the present Writ Petition IS a threat of dispossessing the petitioner from the came to be filed. 4. The Respondent No.4 being considering the explanation submitted by the a quasi judicial authority, without petitioner, has directly issued cyclostat formate of Section 7 notice, in the considered opinion of this Court is nothing but deprivation of principles of natural justice and principle of Fair and Reasonableness on the part of the respondents. 5. On perusal of the record, the petitioner had submitted his explanation pursuant to the impugned notice and there is no whisper about the explanation. As could be seen from the impugned notice, it is noted that there are no reasons, as required,.-while passing the order of eviction under Section 6 of A.P. Land Encroachment Act, 1905 by the Respondent No.4. 6. It is further observed that it is settled preposition of law that once notice was issued under Section 7 of the A.P. Land Encroachment Act, 1905 and if any explanation is submitted, it is obligatory on the part of the respondents to consider same and pass appropriate orders thereon. Without doing so, issuing any other ordeA fs' cbntrary to the principles of natural justice and principle of fair and reasonableness on the part of the public authority. 7. In the instant case, it is found that the petitioner was issued notice under Section 7 of Act, 1905 bn 07.05.2025. For which, the petitioner submitted explanation on 27.03.2025. Therefore, the 4**^ respondent is under the statutory obligation to consider the same and pass appropriate orders. Without doing so again issuing notice under Section 7 as well as order under Section 6 of Act, 1905 is deviation of the constitutional rights of the petitioner in respect of the subject property. '' T 8. In view of the reasons stated above, the impugned notice dated 07.05.2025 issued by the 4*'' respondent is hereby set aside. However, the 4‘^ respondent is hereby directed to consider the explanation of the petitioner dated 27.03.2025. If the same is not available, the petitioner is hereby directed to submit the explanation afresh, within a period of one (1) week from the date of receipt of copy of this Order. After such submission, the 4*^ respondent is directed to consider the same and pass appropriate orders, after having clear demarcation between the subject land and after providing opportunity of hearing to the parties concerned, within a period of two (2) months from the date of receipt of copy of this Order. If the petitioner fails to submit the explanation within a period of one (1) week from the date of receipt of copy of this order, the 4*^ respondent is at liberty to proceed further in accordance with law. Meanwhile, the respondent authorities are directed not to dispossess not to take any coercive steps against the petitioner in respect of the subject property. or 9. With the above direction, the Writ Petition is disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs. 10. As a sequel, miscellaneous applications pending, if any, shall also stand closed. VENKATESWARLU NIMMAGADDA, J Date: 09.05.2025 KK . ■} HIGH COURT DATED:15/05/2025 ORDER WP.No.13409 of 2025 DISPOSING THE WP WITHOUT COSTS