Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Andhra Pradesh · body

2025 DAILYLAW 26055 (AP)

DANGETI SIVAKUMAR v. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH

WP/18521/2025 · 2025-07-17

Subba Reddy Satti

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

APHC010368772025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3331] FRIDAY,THE EIGHTEENTH DAY OF JULY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE SUBBA REDDY SATTI WRIT PETITION NO: 18521/2025 Between: 1. DANGETI SIVAKUMAR, S/O LATE SURYA MOHAN RAO AGED ABOUT 42 YEARS, R/O 4-304, IPPANAPADU VILLAGE, MANDAPETA MANDALAM, KONASEEMA DISTRICT. ...PETITIONER AND 1. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP. BY IT'S PRINCIPAL SECRETARY (R AND B), SECRETARIAT BUILDINGS, VELAGAPUDI, AMARAVATHI. 2. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, AMBEDKAR KONASEEMA DISTRICT, AMALAPURAM. 3. THE REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER, RAMACHANDRAPURAM, KONASEEMA DISTRICT. 4. THE TAHSILDAR, MANDAPETA MANDALAM KONASEEMA DISTRICT. 5. M/S LAKSHMI ASSOCIATES, R/O 12-4-24, ANAPARTHI, KONASEEMA DISTRICT. 6. THE ASSISTANT ENGINEER, ROAD AND BUILDING DEPARTMENT, KONASEEMA DISTRICT, AMALAPURAM. ...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 SRS,J W.P.No.18521 of 2025 pleased topleased to issue WRIT OF MANDAMUS or any other appropriate writ, order or direction to DECLARE the action of the 3RD respondent in not considering my Interlocutory Application, lA. No. of 2025 in Appeal No. 2025 filed on 15.07.2025 against the order dated 08.07.2025 passed by the 4 respondent directing us to remove the alleged encroachments from the subject property admeasuring an extent of 58.97 sq. yards situated in RS. No. 50 of Ippanapadu village, Mandapeta village, Konaseema district, as illegal, arbitrary, violative of provisions of AP Land Encroachment Act, 1905 and contrary to Articles 14, 300-A of of Constitution of India and consequently DIRECT the 3RD respondent to consider and dispose of the lA. No. of 2025 in Appeal No. 2025 filed on 15.07.2025 against the order dated 08.07.2025 passed by the 4TH respondent, in the interest of 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 Pleased to STAY of all further proceedings pursuant to the order dated 08.07.2025 passed by the 4TH respondent directing us to remove the alleged encroachments from the subject property admeasuring an extent of 58.97 sq. yards situated in RS. yards situated in RS. No. 50 of Ippanapadu village, Mandapeta village, Konaseema district, in the interest of justice and pass IA NO: 2 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 respondents not to interfere with my peaceful possession of the subject property admeasuring an extent of 58.97 sq. yards situated in RS. No. 50 of Ippanapadu village, Mandapeta village, Konaseema district, till disposal of the lA. No. of 2025 filed on 15.07.2025, in the interest of of 2025 in Appeal No. justice and pass Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. J.V.PHANIDUTH Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. GP FOR ROADS BUILDINGS 2. GP FOR REVENUE The Court made the following: SRS,J W.P.No.18521 of 2025 :: ORDER :: Heard Sri J.V. Phanidutt, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri Divya Teja, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue, for respondents 2 to 4 and Sri Ch. Praveen, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Roads and Buildings for respondents 1 and 6. 2. Notice to respondent No.5 is dispensed with since no adverse order affecting its right or interest, is passed. 3. The petitioner filed the statutory appeal under Section 10 of the Andhra Pradesh Land Encroachment Act, 1905 (for short ‘the Act’) on the file of learned respondent No.3, on 15.07.2025 (Ex.P1) against the order, dated 08.07.2025 passed by respondent No.4 under Section 6 of the Act (Ex.P2). Respondent No.4 ordered eviction of the petitioner and others (respondents therein) and removal of encroachments from government land in R.S.No.50, Road-Poramboke to an extent of 426.13 square yards. Pending the appeal respondent No.4 is trying to dispossess the petitioner from the structure (tin shed) constructed in an extent of 58.97 square yards, in R.S.No.50 of Ippanapadu village, Mandapeta Mandal, Konaseema District. Hence, the writ petition. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that respondent No.4 without conducting proper enquiry and giving opportunity of hearing, passed the order (Ex.P2) under Section 6 of the Act, against a dead person. He would submit that pending the appeal on the file of respondent No.3, respondent No.4 is trying to dispossess the petitioner from the subject structure 5. Learned Assistant Government Pleader, on instructions would submit that respondent No.3 will dispose of the petitioner’s appeal strictly as per the law. 6. As seen from Ex.P1, with the appeal, the petitioner also filed an application seeking stay of proceedings passed by respondent No.4. SRS,J W.P.No.18521 of 2025 7. Section 11 of the Act prescribes sixty days time to file an appeal after excluding the time to get copy of the decision. 8. In the case at hand, respondent No.4 passed the order on 08.07.2025 and the appeal was filed on the file of respondent No.3, on 15.07.2025. Respondent No.4 ought not to have resorted to any hasty steps to demolish the structure, till the stay application, at least, is considered by respondent No.3. 9. Given the facts and circumstances of the case, this writ petition is disposed of at the admission stage, with the consent of learned counsel on either side, directing respondent No.4 not to demolish the structure of the petitioner admeasuring 58.97 square yards, in R.S.No.50 of Ippanapadu village, Mandapeta Mandal, Konaseema District, till disposal of the interlocutory application or the appeal on the file of learned respondent No.3. Learned respondent No.3 shall dispose of the interlocutory application or the appeal as expeditiously as possible by following the procedure. No costs. As a sequel, pending miscellaneous petitions, if any, shall stand closed. ___________________________ JUSTICE SUBBA REDDY SATTI Date : 18.07.2025 IKN SRS,J W.P.No.18521 of 2025 THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE SUBBA REDDY SATTI WRIT PETITION NO: 18521 of 2025 Date : 18.07.2025 IKN