APHC010352432025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3331] TUESDAY, THE FIFTEENTH DAY OF JULY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE SUBBA REDDY SATTI WRIT PETITION NO: 17723/2025 Between: 1. ALAKUNTA SRIHARI, S/O ALAKUNTA VENKATA SWAMY AGED ABOUT 65 YEARS, R/O B C COLONY, GUNDAVOLU, RAPUR MANDAL SPSR NELLORE DISTRICT. 524414 2. ALAKUNTA PAPAIAH, S/O VENKATAIAH, AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS, R/O B C COLONY, GUNDAVOLU, RAPUR MANDAL, SPSR NELLORE DISTRICT. 524414 3. ALAKUNTA RAKESH, S/O PENCHALAIAH, AGED ABOUT 23 YEARS, R/O B C COLONY, GUNDAVOLU, RAPUR MANDAL, SPSR NELLORE DISTRICT. 524414 4. KOPPALA ANKESH, S/O KOPPALA ANKAIAH, AGED ABOUT 35 YEARS, R/O HARIJANAWADA, GUNDAVOLU, RAPUR MANDAL, SPSR NELLORE DISTRICT. 524414 ...PETITIONER(S) AND 1. THE STATE OF AP, REP. BY ITS PRINCIPLE SECRETARY (REVENUE). SECRETARIAT, VELAGAPUDI, AMARAVATHI, GUNTUR DISTRICT. 2. THE DISTRICT COLLECTORCUMMAGISTRATE, COLLECTORATE COMPOUND, NELLORE, SPSR NELLORE DISTRICT. 3. THE REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER, NELLORE DIVISION SPSR NELLORE DISTRICT. 2 4. THE TAHSILDAR, RAPUR MANDAL, SPSR NELLORE DISTRICT. ...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 to issue any writ or direction or order, more particularly in the nature of writ of mandamus declaring the action of the respondents trying to dispossess the writ petitioners 1 and 2 for an extent of AC. 2-87 cents (Ac. 1- 02 cents under DKT) in Sy.No.437/4, 5 and 6 AC. 0-95 cents in Sy.No.437/3 granted under DKT by 2nd Respondent on 06-10-1976 Petitioners 3 and 4 for an extent of AC. 1-40 cents in Sy.No.438 and AC. 1-50 cents in Sy.No.438 of dry land respectively which is in their occupation situated in Gundavolu Village, Rapur Mandal, SPSR Nellore District without following due process of law from the possession and enjoyment as illegal, arbitrary, devoid of jurisdiction and violative of principles of natural justice and pass 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 restraining the Respondents from illegal dispossession of the writ petitioners 1 and 2 for an extent of AC. 2-87 cents (Ac. 2-87 cents (Ac. 1-02 cents under DKT) in Sy.No.437/4, 5 & 6; AC.0-95 cents in Sy.No.437/3 granted under DKT by 2nd Respondent on 06-10-1976; Petitioners 3 and 4 for an extent of AC. 1-40 cents in Sy.No.438 and AC.1-50 cents in Sy.No.438 of dry land which is in their occupation situated in Gundavolu Village, Rapur Mandal, SPSR Nellore District in any manner interfering with the peaceful possession and enjoyment of the writ petitioners pending disposal of the writ petition, in the interest of justice and pass Counsel for the Petitioner(S): T G PRASAD REDDY Counsel for the Respondent(S): GP FOR REVENUE The Court made the following ORDER: Notice vide R.C.B.No.26/2025, dated 13.02.2025, under Section 7 of the Andhra Pradesh Land Encroachment Act, 1905 (for short ‘the Act’), was 3 issued to the petitioners (Ex.P.2). The petitioners submitted an explanation dated 18.02.2025 (Ex.P.3). 2. Heard Sri Raghu Ram, learned counsel representing Sri T.G. Prasad, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri Divya Teja, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue, appearing for respondents 1 to 4. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the petitioners 1 and 2 were assigned DKT patta on 06.10.1976 (Ex.P.1). He would also submit that without passing any order, the 4th respondent is trying to dispossess the petitioners from the lands mentioned in the notice. 4. Learned Assistant Government Pleader, while not disputing the notice under Section 7 of the Act (Ex.P.2) and the explanation submitted by the petitioners (Ex.P.3), would submit that the Tahsildar – 4th respondent will pass orders under Section 6 of the Act. 5. Thus, as seen from the material available on record, there is no dispute regarding the issuance of notice under Section 7 of the Act (Ex.P.2) and the explanation submitted by the petitioners (Ex.P.3). The 4th respondent ought to have passed an order under Section 6 of the Act. Before passing an order, the 4th respondent shall not interfere with the petitioners’ possession of the property. 6. Given the facts and circumstances of the case, the Writ Petition is disposed of, at the stage of admission with the consent of both the learned counsel, directing the 4th respondent to consider the explanation submitted by 4 the petitioner to the notice issued under Sec 7 of the Act, and pass appropriate orders within four (4) weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. Till an appropriate order is passed, the 4th respondent shall not interfere with the possession of the petitioners without following due process. There shall be no order as to costs. As a sequel, pending miscellaneous petitions, if any, shall stand closed. ___________________________ JUSTICE SUBBA REDDY SATTI Date: 15.07.2025 KAS