APHC010357432025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3331] THURSDAY,THE SEVENTEENTH DAY OF JULY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE SUBBA REDDY SATTI WRIT PETITION NO: 18045/2025 Between: 1. B LAKSHMAMMA, , W/O. B.VENKATRAMANA, AGED 62 YEARS, OCC HOUSE WIFE, R/O. D.NO.4-999 (OLD D.NO.4-4-A1818), CTM VILLAGE, MADANAPALLE MANDAL, ANNAMAYYA DISTRICT. ...PETITIONER AND 1. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, REVENUE DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT, VELAGAPUDI,AMARAVATI, GUNTUR DISTRICT. 2. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, ANNAMAYYA DISTRICT AT RAYACHOTY. 3. THE REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER, MADANAPALLE REVENEU DIVISION, MADANAPALLE, ANNAMAYYA DISTRICT. 4. THE THASILDAR, MADANAPALLE MANDAL, ANNAMAYYA 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 a writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of WRIT OF MANDAMUS declaring the action of the 4th respondent in issuing a notice dated 08.07.2025 under Section 7 of the Andhra Pradesh 2 Land Encroachment Act, 1905, falsely alleging that petitioners property situated at Door No. 4-999 (Old D.No.4-4- A1818), having Assessment No. 2401, covered by Sy.No. 778 of CTM Revenue Village, Madanapalle Mandal, Annamayya District, is an encroachment on Cheruvu Poramboke land under Sy.No. 832, despite the existence of an interim status quo order dated 01.10.2024 passed by this Hon’ble Court in I.A.No.1 of 2024 in W.P.No. 22093 of 2024, and despite the fact that there is no Cheruvu or Poramboke land physically present at the location, as illegal, irregular, irrational, without jurisdiction, violative of due process, and contravenes petitioners constitutional rights under Articles 14, 21, and 300-A of the Constitution of India and consequently direct the respondents not to interfere in any manner with petitioners peaceful possession and enjoyment over her said property and pass such 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 operation of the notice dated 08.07.2025 issued by the 4th respondent and direct the respondents not to take any coercive steps, including eviction or demolition, with respect to petitioner’s property at Door No. 4-999 (Old D.No. 4-4-A1818), having Assessment No. 2401, covered by Sy.No. 778, CTM Revenue Village, Madanapalle Mandal, Annamayya District, pending disposal of the present Writ Petition, and pass such Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. RAJENDRA C Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. RAJENDRA C Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. GP FOR REVENUE The Court made the following ORDER: Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue for respondents 1 to 4. 2. Challenging the notice vide Ref.A/25/2025 dated 08.07.2025 under Section 7 of the Andhra Pradesh Land Encroachment Act, 1905 (for short “the Act”) issued by the Tahsildar, Mandanapalle Manadal, pointing out the 3 encroachment made by the petitioner to an extent of Ac.0-015 cents out of Ac.2-35 cents in Sy.No.832 of Chinnathippasamudram Revenue Village, Madanapalle Mandal, the above writ petition has been filed. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner is the absolute owner and possessor of house site property admeasuring 90 Sq.yards in Sy.No.778 of CTM Revenue Village, Madanapalle Mandal, Annamayya District. The petitioner constructed a house and has been residing therein. The local authorities assigned D.No.4-4-A1818 (present D.No.4-999). Learned counsel would also submit that the possession of the petitioner was recognized and the Government issued a possession certificate vide Ex.P.2. 4. Be that as it may, the notice Ex.P.1 was issued to a different survey number, to which the petitioner is nothing to do and the 4th respondent is interfering with the petitioner’s possession of house bearing D.No.4-999, Assessment No.2401 in Sy.No.778 of CTM Revenue Village, Madanapalle Mandal. 5. Learned Assistant Government Pleader would submit that the petitioner did not submit any explanation to the notice Ex.P.1. If the petitioner submits an explanation, the 4th respondent shall consider and pass appropriate orders under Section 6 of the Act. 6. In reply, learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner will submit an explanation to the notice Ex.P.1 within the stipulated period. 7. Given the facts and circumstances of the case, the Writ Petition is disposed of at the admission stage with the consent of learned counsel on either side, giving liberty to the petitioner to submit an explanation to Ex.P.1 notice. Upon receipt of such explanation, the 4th respondent shall pass a reasoned order. Till a final order is passed under Section 6 of the Act, the 4th 4 respondent shall not take any coercive steps concerning the property in the petitioner’s possession and enjoyment, the house bearing D.No.4-999, Assessment No.2401 in Sy.No.778 of CTM Revenue Village, Madanapalle Mandal, Annamayya District without following due process. No order as to costs. Miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shall stand closed. _____________________ SUBBA REDDY SATTI, J Date: 17.07.2025 KA 5 THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE SUBBA REDDY SATTI WRIT PETITION NO: 18045/2025 Date: 17.07.2025 KA 6