• J APHC010349292025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) 0!^ O I m !iil( (F O -y w FRIDAY, THE ELEVENTH DAY OF JULY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE VENKATESWARLU WRIT PETITION NQ: 17537 OF 9C\9fi h /, NIMMAGADDA Between: 1. Smt. Sake Sumitra, W/o Sake Sivaiah, Age 32 years, Resident of Nemallapalli Village, Pamidi Mandal, Ananthapuramu District. 2. Sake Sivaiah, S/o Sake Pothanna, Age 37 years. Resident of Nemallapalli Village, Pamidi Mandal, Ananthapuramu District. ...Petitioners AND 1. The State of Andhra Pradesh, Rep by its Principal Secretary, Department of Revenue, at Secretariat, Velagapudi, Guntur District, Andhra Pradesh. Amaravathi, 2. The District Collector, Ananthapuramu District 3. The Ananthapuramu. Ananthapuramu Division, Revenue Ananthapuramu District. 4. The Tahsildar, Nemallipali Village, Pamidi District. Divisional Officer, Mandal, Ananthapuramu ...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 or direction, more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus, declaring the action of the Respondent in issuing the a impugned Order dated 13.06.2025, Rc. No. B/200/2025, without considering the reply submitted by the petitioners and without providing hearing opportunity and threatening to remove the crop of the petitioner's land situated in S. No. 107, Nemallapalli Village, Pamidi Mandal, Ananthapuramu Distric illegal, unlawful, against the principles of natural justice and Violation of Article 14, 19, 21 and 300A of Constitution of India and Consequently, to set aside the Order dated 13.06.2025, Rc. No. B/200/2025 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 petitioner’s Crop, situated in S. No. 107, Nemallapalli Village, Pamidi Mandal Ananthapuramu District, till pending disposal of the writ petition Counsel for the Petitioners: BANKA NAGESWARA RAO Counsel for the Respondents No.1 to 4: GP FOR REVENUE The Court made the following order: as APHC010349292025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) 0^ [3329] FRIDAY,THE ELEVENTH DAY OF JULY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE VENKATESWARLU NIMMAGADDA WRIT PETITION NO: 17537/2025 Between: 1.SMT. SAKE SUMITRA,, W/0 SAKE SIVAIAH, RESIDENT OF NEMALLAPALLI VILLAGE ANANTHAPURAMU DISTRICT. 2.SAKE SIVAIAH,, S/0 SAKE POTHANNA. AGE 37 YEARS. RESIDENT OF NEMALLAPALLI VILLAGE, PAMIDI MANDAL, ANANTHAPURAMU DISTRICT. AGE 32 YEARS, PAMIDI MANDAL, ...PETITIONER(S) AND 1.THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, VELAGAPUDI PRADESH. DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE, AT SECRETARIAT, AMARAVATHI, GUNTUR DISTRICT, ANDHRA 2. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, ANANTHAPURAMU DISTRICT, ANANTHAPURAMU. 3.THE REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER, ANANTHAPURAMU DIVISION, ANANTHAPURAMU DISTRICT. 4.THE TAHSILDAR, NEMALLIPALI VILLAGE, ANANTHAPURAMU DISTRICT. PAMIDI MANDAL, ...RESPONDENT(S): 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 topleased to issue a Writ or direction, more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus, declaring the action of the 4th Respondent in issuing the impugned Order dated 13.06.2025, Rc. No. B/200/2025, without considering the reply submitted by the petitioners and without providing hearing opportunity and threatening to remove the crop of the petitioner's land situated in S. No. 107, Nemallapalli Village, Pamidi Mandal, Ananthapuramu Distric, as illegal, unlawful, against the principles of natural justice and Violation of Article 14, 19, 21 and 300A of Constitution of India and Consequently, to set aside the Order dated 13.06.2025, Rc. No. B/200/2025 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 pleased to direct the 4th respondent not to interfere with the petitioner’s Crop, situated in S. No. 107, Nemallapalli Village, Pamidi Mandal Ananthapuramu District, till pending disposal of the writ petition Counsel for the Petitioner(S): 1. BANKA NAGESWARA RAO Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1.GP FOR REVENUE The Court made the following: THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE VENKATESWARLU NIMMAGADDA WRIT PETITION NO: 17537/2025 ORDER: This writ petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of the India seeking the following reliefs;- “to issue a Writ or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the 4 Respondent In Issuing the Impugned Order dated 13.06.2025, Rc.No.B/200/2025, without considering the reply submitted by the petitioners and without providing hearing opportunity and threatening to remove the crop of the petitioners land situated in S. No. 107, Nemallapalli Village, Pamidi Mandal, Ananthapuramu District as illegal, unlawful, against the principles of natural justice and Violation of Article 14, 19, 21 and 300-A of Constitution of India and Consequently to set aside the Order dated 13.06.2025, Rc.No.B/200/2025 and pass such other order or orders. ” th Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned Government 2. Pleader for Revenue for the respondents. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioners herein 3. are the absolute owners and possessors of the land admeasuring to an extent of Ac.0.52 cents in S.No.107 situated at Nemallapalli Village, Pamidi Mandal, Ananthapuramu district. Subsequently, the petitioner No.1 was issued D-Form patta from the then Tahsildar on 18.07.2020. Since then, the petitioners have been in peaceful possession and enjoyment of the subject land. He further submits that the petitioners herein are also having land admeasuring Ac.3.50 cents situated in S.N0.IO6B adjacent to the present subject land. While things stood thus, respondent No.4 herein issued notice dated 26.05.2025 to the petitioners under Section 7 of the Andhra Pradesh Land Encroachment Act, 1905 alleging that the petitioners herein encroached land situated in L.P.No.310 (old Sy.No.107) to an extent of Ac.0.46 cents and L.P.No.273 (old Sy.No.107) to an extent of Ac.0.30 cents. Pursuant to the said notice, the petitioners herein submitted a reply on 13.06.2025 stating that they did not encroach any property and the said property is purchased by them from one Gujjala Adenna/ Adena. But, respondent No.4, without considering the said reply issued impugned order/ proceedings under Section 6 of the Andhra Pradesh Land Encroachment Act, 1905 on 13.06.2025 itself, directing the petitioners herein to evict the subject land within two (02) days from the date of receipt of the order. Aggrieved by the said proceedings, the petitioners herein filed the present writ petition. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioners relied upon the judgment rendered by the Composite High Court of Andhra Pradesh, Hyderabad, in Kadiyala Sudershan and others v. Government of Andhra Pradesh and others^ , wherein the relevant portion of the said order is extracted hereunder: “A person in possession of the Government land is liable to be evicted under the provisions of the Act. The Act has laid down the procedure for evicting such person. As a first step towards this direction, a show-cause notice under Section 1 of the Act requires to be given to the person in occupation of the land. After receiving the notice, an order needs to be passed under Section 6 of the Act If the competent authority is satisfied that the person in possession 2013 (6) ALT 42 of the land is liable to the evicted, he has to issue a notice in the prescribed form. Though the provisions of Section 6 of the Act do not in express terms enjoin on the competent authority to pass a speaking order, the very fact that Section 7 of the Act envisages a show-cause notice pre- supposes that the competent authority has to deal with the explanation/objections filed by the person In possession of the land. Unless a reasoned order is passed, the person in occupation of the land does not know as to why an order of eviction is passed against him. Further, an appeal under Section 10 of the Act is envisaged by the Act. Unless the order contains reasons, the appellate authority will not be in a position to examine the validity or otherwise of the order and decide the appeal. From the scheme of the Act, I am of the opinion that the notice of eviction prescribed under Section 6 of the Act, which is akin to a decree, needs to be supported by a reasoned order comparable to a judgment. Otherwise, Section 7 of the Act providing for issuance of a show-cause notice would be rendered nugatory or reduced to an empty formality. ” In view of the ratio laid down by the Composite High Court of Andhra 5. Pradesh, Hyderabad, the impugned proceedings dated 13.06.2025 passed by respondent No.4 under section 6 of the Act is contrary to the law and is liable to be set aside. On the other hand, learned Government Pleader for the respondents 6. submits that respondent No.4 issued eviction proceedings dated 13.06.2025 under section 6 of the Andhra Pradesh Land Encroachment Act, 1905, which are not in compliance with the judgment referred supra. Hence, the subject matter may be remanded for fresh consideration. Having regard to the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Government Pleader for the respondents and on i 7. perusal of the material placed on record and after considering the ratio laid down by the Composite High Court of Andhra Pradesh, Hyderabad referred supra, this Court is of the considered view that the impugned proceedings dated 13.06.2025 issued under Section 6 of the A.P. Land Encroachment Act, 1905 by respondent No.4 is contrary to law and liable to be set aside. Accordingly, the impugned proceedings dated 13.06.2025 issued by respondent No.4 under Section 6 of the A.P. Land Encroachment Act 8. 1905 is hereby set aside. However, respondent No.4 is at liberty to proceed further by considering the explanation/ reply dated 13.06.2025 submitted by the ^ petitioners and pass a reasoned order by taking into consideration the ratio laid down by the Composite High Court of Andhra Pradesh and the contents made in the explanation, within referred supra a reasonable time, after providing opportunity of hearing to the petitioners holders, if any. Till passing of such order. Status shall be maintained by all the parties concerned i of the property. 9. With the above directions, the writ petition is disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs. as well as other stake quo obtaining as on today in respect of the possession Consequently, Miscellaneous Petitions, if any, pending in the writ petition shall stand closed. Sd/- K. TATA RAO DEPUTY REGISTRAR ScTION OFFICER //TRUE COPY// To, 1. The Principal Secretary, State of Andhra Pradesh, Department of Revenue, at Secretariat, Velagapudi, Andhra Pradesh. 2. The District Collector, Ananthapuramu District, Ananthapuramu. Amaravathi, Guntur District, 3. The Revenue Divisional Officer, Ananthapuramu Division, Ananthapuramu District. 4. The Tahsildar, Nemallipali Village, Pamidi Mandal, Ananthapuramu District. 5. One CC to SRI BANKA NAGESWARA RAO Advocate [OPUC] 6. Two CCs to GP FOR REVENUE High Court of Andhra Pradesh [OUT] 7. Two CD Copies gsg m HIGH COURT DATED: 11/07/2025 ORDER WP NO. 17537 OF 2025 DISPOSING THE WP WITHOUT COSTS