APHC010385922025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3331] TUESDAY,THE TWENTY NINETH DAY OF JULY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE SUBBA REDDY SATTI WRIT PETITION NO: 19565/2025 Between: 1. VEERA VANI @ KALAI VANI, S/O. CHALAPATHI RAO, AGED ABOUT 52 YEARS, R/O. NORTH RAJUPALEM VILLAGE KODAVALURU MANDAL, SPSR NELLORE DISTRICT. ...PETITIONER AND 1. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, REVENUE DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT BUILDINGS, VELAGAPUDI, AMARAVATHI, GUNTUR DISTRICT. 2. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, SPSR NELLORE DISTRICT, NELLORE. 3. THE REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER, KAVALI DIVISION, KAVALI, SPSR NELLORE DISTRICT. 4. THE TAHSILDHAR, KODAVALURU 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 a Writ order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus, challenging the action of Respondent No.4 in taking steps to evict and demolish Petitioners property situated in D.No.4-78 in Sy No.50/2 of North Rajupalem Village, Kodavaluru Mandal, SPSR Nellore District without passing any order under Section 6 of A.P. Land 2 Encroachment Act as being illegal, arbitrary and violation of Articles 14, 21 and 300-A of the Constitution of India and consequently direct Respondent No.4 not to evict or demolish Petitioners property situated in D.No.4-78 in Sy No.50/2 of North Rajupalem Village, Kodavaluru Mandal, SPSR Nellore District without passing any order under Section 6 of A.P. Land Encroachment Act 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 direct Respondent No.4 not to interfere with the peaceful possession and enjoyment of Petitioners’ property situated in D.No.4-78 in Sy No.50/2 of North Rajupalem Village, Kodavaluru Mandal, SPSR Nellore District and pass Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. MALIREDDY GOWTHAM Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. GP FOR REVENUE The Court made the following ORDER: Heard Sri M.Gowtham, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri Divya Theja, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue for respondents 1 to 4. 2. A notice under Section 7 of the Andhra Pradesh Land Encroachment Act, 1905 (for short “the Act’) vide RCB.237/2025, dated 16.07.2025 (Ex.P.1) was issued to the petitioner pointing out that the petitioner encroached an extent of Ac.0-02 cents of “canal poramboke (Govt.)” in Sy.No.50/2 of North Rajupalem Village. The petitioner submitted an explanation dated 21.07.2025 (Ex.P.2). 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner intended to submit an additional explanation dated 23.07.2025 (Ex.P.3) to the notice Ex.P.1. However, the 4th respondent-Tahsildar is not inclined to receive the additional explanation. By issuing notice under Section 7 of the Act, the 4th 3 respondent is trying to demolish the shop bearing D.No.4-78 in Sy.No.50/2 of North Rajapalem Village, Kodavaluru Mandal, SPSR Nellore District. 4. Learned Assistant Government Pleader on instructions would submit that the order under Section 6 of the Act has not been passed so far. 5. As seen from the material, a notice dated 16.07.2025 under Section 7 of the Act was issued to the petitioner, and the petitioner submitted Ex.P.2 explanation. No order under Section 6 of the Act has been passed so far. The 4th respondent is duty bound to consider the explanation submitted by the petitioner under Ex.P.2. The grievance of the petitioner is that the 4th respondent has not received her additional explanation under Ex.P.2. The Rules of the Natural Justice must be adhered to by the 4th respondent before passing any order under Section 6 of the Act. 6. Since no order under Sec 6 of the Act has been passed, the 4th respondent shall receive the additional explanation dated 23.07.2025 submitted by the petitioner and conduct an inquiry by giving an opportunity of hearing and thereafter shall pass a reasoned order. The 4th respondent shall not interfere till an order is passed under Section 6 of the Act. In case an order is passed under Section 6 of the Act, the 4th respondent shall provide an opportunity to the petitioner to file a statutory appeal under Section 10 of the Act. Until then, the 4th respondent shall not take any coercive steps. No order as to costs. As a sequel, pending miscellaneous petitions, if any, shall stand closed. ___________________________ JUSTICE SUBBA REDDY SATTI Date: 29.07.2025 KA 4 THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE SUBBA REDDY SATTI WRIT PETITION NO: 19565/2025 Date:29.07.2025 KA