APHC010396442025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) THURSDAY,THE THIRTY FIRST DAY OF JUL TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE VENKATESWARLU NIMMAGADDA WRIT PETITION NO: 20004 OF 2025 Between: Smt. Talagana Kanthamma, W/o. Karranna, aged about 77 years, Occ; House wife, R/o Haripuram Village, Mandasa Mandal, Srikakulam District ...PETITIONER AND 1. The State of Andhra Pradesh, Rep by its principal Secretary, Panchayat Raj Department, Secretariat, velagapudi, Amaravati. 2. The state of Andhra Pradesh, Rep by its Principal Secretary, Revenue Department, Secretariat, Velagapudi, Amaravati 3. The District Collector, Srikakulam , Srikakulam District. 4. The Revenue Divisional Officer, Palasa , Srikakulam district 5. The Tahsildar, Mandasa Mandal, Srikakulam District 6. Village Revenue Officer, Haripuram Gram panchayat, Mandasa Mandal, Srikakulam District. 7. Haripuram Gram Panchayat, Rep. by its Panchayat Secretary, Haripuram Village, Mandasa Mandal, Srikakulam District. ...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, order or direction more particularly in the nature of WRIT OF MANDAMUS, declaring the action of the respondents without considering the representation dated. 18.07.2025, 26.07.2025 by the respondent 6 and 7 Gram Panchayat officials in failing to protect and maintain proper records of public /private land and in not submitting the factual possession report regarding the peititoner's land situated in survey no.97 of haripuram village, Mandasa Mandal, Srikakulam District and respondent no.5 tahsildar action in issuing the notice on dated. 17.07.2025 by variation of extents and also in connection with the complaint of the party without following the orders of this Honorable in WP no.2012 of 2012 dated 13.06.2024, without issuing a proper show cause notice under section 7 of AP Land encroachment Act, 1905 dated 27.06.2023 as arbitrary, illegal, mal fide in violation of the natural justice and contrary to the binding directions issued by this Honorable Court in WP No.2012 of 2024 dated 30.01.2024 2. Declare that the impugned notice issued by the respondent no.5 tahsildar based on a motivated and malicious complaint from the third -party unsustainable in view of the earlier proceedings having been dropped in 1954 and the petitioner being in settled possession for several decades, with her rights being recognized by the grant of settlement patta and other records . are revenue 3. Direct the 5*'^ respondent to conduct a fresh enquiry in terms of the order in WP No.2012 of 2024, after affording due petitioner to submit relevant documents and after obtaining reports from e"- and T'" respondent gram panchayat / village revenue officer concerned and till such opportunities to the the enquiry is concluded, direct that no coercive steps be taken against the petitioner or her property. 4. Directing the respondent 6 and 7 to conduct a proper field inspection and submit a report regarding long standing possession and enjoyment of petitioner's land admeasuring Ac.0,33.cents i : in survey no.97 of haripuram village , and to take steps in accordance with law to prevent misuse of PGRS mechanism for personal vendetta. lA NO: 1 OF 2Q2fi 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 restrain the respondent no.5 in taking any coercive action or dispossessing the petitioner from the subject land and direct the 5*'' maintain status quo with respect to possession and enjoyment of the land by the petitioner, pending completion of a fresh enquiry strictly in terms of the directions issued by this Honorable court in WP No.2012 of 2024 dated 30.01.2024 , after obtaining the report from village revenue officer and Panchayat secretary i.e., /Respondent Gram panchayat. respondent tahsildar to Counsel for the Petitioner: CHINTAPALLI SRINIVAS Counsel for the Respondent No.1: GP FOR PANCHAYAT RAJ AND RURAL DEVELOPMENT Counsel for the Respondent Nos.2 to 5:GP FOR REVENUE Counsel for the Respondent Nos.6 &7: SRI Y. KOTESWARA RAO SC FOR ZPP, MPP & GRAM PANCHAYAT The Court made the following order: L APHC010396442025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3329] THURSDAY,THE THIRTY FIRST DAY OF JULY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE VENKATESWARLU NIMMAGADDA WRIT PETITION NO: 20004/2025 Between: 1.TALAGANA KANTHAMMA, W/0 KARRANNA ,AGED ABOUT 77 YEARS OCC HOUSE WIFE , R/0 HARIPURAM VILLAGE, MANDASA MANDAL , SRIKAKULAM DISTRICT ...PETITIONER AND 1.THE STATE OF AP, REP BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY PANCHAYAT RAJ DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT, VELAGAPUDI, AMARAVATI. 2.THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP BY ITS PRINCIPAL REVENUE DEPARTMENT. SECRETARIAT, SECRETARY VELAGAPUDI, AMARAVATI 3.THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, SRIKAKULAM , SRIKAKULAM DISTRICT. 4.THE REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER, PALASA , SRIKAKULAM DISTRICT 5.THE TAHSILDAR, MANDASA MANDAL , SRIKAKULAM DISTRICT 6.VILLAGE REVENUE OFFICER, HARIPURAM GRAM PANCHAYAT , MANDASA MANDAL , SRIKAKULAM DISTRICT. 7. HARIPURAM GRAM PANCHAYAT, REP BY ITS PANCHAYAT SECRETARY HARIPURAM VILLAGE, MANDASA MANDAL, SRIKAKULAM DISTRICT. m ...RESPONDENT(S): Pstition 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 , order or direction more particularly in the nature of WRIT OF MANDAMUS , declaring the action of the respondents without considering the representation dated. 18.07.2025, 26.07.2025 by the respondent 6 and 7 Gram Panchayat officials in failing to protect and maintain proper records of public /private land and in not submitting the factual possession report regarding the peititoner's land situated in survey no.97 of haripuram village , Mandasa Mandal, Srikakulam District and respondent no.5 tahsildar action in issuing the notice on dated. 17.07.2025 by variation of extents and also in connection with the complaint of the 3RD party without following the orders of this Honorable in WP no.2012 of 2012 dated 13.06.2024, without issuing a proper show cause notice under section 7 of AP Land encroachment Act, 1905 dated 27.06.2023, as arbitrary,illegal , mal fide in violation of the natural justice and contrary to the binding directions issued by this Honorable Court in WP No.2012 of 2024 dated 30.01.2024 2. Declare that the impugned notice issued by the respondent no.5 tahsildar based on a motivated and malicious complaint from the third -party unsustainable in view of the earlier proceedings having been dropped in 1954 and the petitioner being in settled possession for several decades, with her rights being recognized by the grant of settlement patta and other records . 3. Direct the 5TH respondent to conduct a fresh enquiry in terms of the order in WP No.2012 of 2024 , after affording due opportunities to the petitioner to submit relevant documents and after obtaining reports from the 6TH and 7TH respondent gram panchayat / village revenue officer concerned, and till such enquiry is concluded , direct that no coercive steps be taken against the petitioner or her property . 4. Directing the respondent 6 and 7 to conduct a proper field inspection and submit a report regarding long standing possession and enjoyment of petitioner's land admeasuring Ac.0,33.cents in survey no.97 of haripuram village , and to take steps in accordance with law to prevent misuse of PGRS mechanism for personal vendetta . 5. Pass 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 restrain the respondent no.5 in taking any coercive action or dispossessing the petitioner from the subject land and direct the 5th respondent tahsildar to maintain status quo with respect to possession and are revenue 3 enjoyment of the land by the petitioner , pending completion of a fresh enquiry strictly in terms of the directions issued by this Honorable court in WP No.2012 of 2024 dated 30.01.2024 , after obtaining the report from village revenue officer and panchayat, and pass Counsel for the Petitioner: Panchayat secretary i.e., 7TH respondent Gram 1.CH1NTAPALLI SRINIVAS Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1.GP FOR PANCHAYAT RAJ RURAL DEV 2.GP FOR REVENUE The Court made the following: THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE VENKATESWARLU NIMMAGADDA WRIT PETITION NO: 20004/2025 ORDER: This writ petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of the India seeking the following reliefs:- “to issue a writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the respondents without considering the representations dated 18.07.2025, 26.07.2025 by the respondent Nos.6 and 7 Gram Panchayat officials in failing to protect and maintain proper records of public /private land and in not submitting the factual possession report regarding the petitioner’s land situated in survey No.97 of Haripuram village, Mandasa Mandal, Srikakulam District and respondent No.5/Tahsildar action in issuing the notice dated 17.07.2025 by variation ^of extents and also In connection with the complaint of the 3 party without following the orders of this Honorable Court in W.P.No.2012 of 2012 dated 30.01.2024, without issuing a proper show cause notice under section 7 of AP Land Encroachment Act, 1905 dated 27.06.2023, as arbitrary, violation of the natural justice and illegal, malafide In contrary to the binding directions issued by this Honorable Court in W.P.No.2012 of 2024 dated 30.01.2024. 2. Declare that the impugned notice issued by the a motivated and respondent No.5/Tahsildar based on malicious complaint from the third-party are unsustainable in view of the earlier proceedings having been dropped 1954 and the petitioner being in settled possession for several decades, with her rights being recognized by the grant of settlement patta and other revenue records. 3 Direct the 5^^ respondent to conduct a fresh enquiry terms of the order in W.P.No.2012 of 2024, after affording due opportunities to the petitioner to submit ^^relevan^t documents and after obtaining reports from the 6 ^nd 7 respondent gram panchayat/village concerned, and till such enquiry is concluded , direct that steps be taken against the petitioner or her in in revenue officer no coercive property - ^ 4. Directing the respondent Nos. 6 and 7 to conduct a proper field inspection and submit a report regarding long standing possession and enjoyment of petitioner's land admeasuring Ac.0.33 cents in survey No.97 of Haripuram village , and to take steps in accordance with law to prevent misuse of PGRS mechanism for personal vendetta and pass such other order. ” 2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner, learned Government Pleader for Panchayat Raj for respondent No.1, learned Government Pleader for Revenue for respondent Nos.2 to 5 and the learned Standing Counsel for respondent Nos.6 and 7. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is in possession and enjoyment of the land admeasuring to an extent of Ac.0.33 cents in Survey No.97 of Haripuram village, Mandasa Mandal, Srikakulam District. Later, she got constructed house thereon and she has been staying in the said house. While so, the 5‘^ respondent issued notice under Section 6 of the A.P. Land Encroachment Act, 1905 stating that the petitioner is under occupation of Government poramboke land admeasuring to extent of Ac.0.33 cents in survey No.97 and directed the petitioner to evict the subject land. The said notice was challenged before this Court by way of W.P.No.2012 of 2024. Considering the contentions of both the learned counsel, this Court was pleased to pass an order dated 30.01.2024 in the said writ petition, which is extracted hereunder; an 6 “It is a well settled principle of law that unless a reasoned order Is passed the person in occupation of the land does not know as to why an order of rejection is passed against him. Further an appeal under section 10 of the act is envisaged and 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 this Court is of the firm opinion that the notice of eviction prescribed under section 6 of the act which is a kin 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 and reduce to an empty formality. Flaving regard to a fact that the Tahsildar has not passed a separate reasoned order on the very same day the impugned notice is issued under section 6. In view of the same, the order impugned dated 17.01.2024 is unsustainable and is liable to be set aside. Accordingly the impugned notice is set aside and the matter is remanded back to the Tahsildar concerned and is directed to pass a fresh reasoned order after providing an opportunity of personal hearing to the petitioner uninfluenced by the observations in his order dated 27.01.2024 in Rc.No.23/2024 and communicate the same to the petitioner. Till such exercise, the respondent authorities are directed not to take any coercive steps. 7. Accordingly, the Writ Petition is Allowed. ” 7 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that finally this Court remanded the matter for fresh consideration in accordance with law. He further submits that for the reasons best known to the respondents, they kept quiet for a period of six months. Due to the complaint of the third party, now the respondent issued notice 17.07.2025 directing the petitioner to submit documents proving his title over the subject property. on 5. Learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that i the notice the extent of land in was mentioned as Ac.0.48 cents, contrary to the earlier notices issued by the Gram Panchayat, wherein the extent of land was mentioned as Ac.0.30 cents and Ac.0.33 cents. Therefore, the respondents are not clear about the extent which was occupied by the petitioner. Hence, the impugned notice is liable to be suspended. 6. On the other hand, learned Standing Counsel for the Gram Panchayat as well as learned Government Pleader for respondent Nos.2 to 5 submits that in pursuance of the orders of this Court impugned notice dated 17.07.2025 was issued. The variation of the extent of the land the as alleged by the petitioner is to be determined/demarcated, after submission of the explanation by the petitioner. After submissions of the explanation by the petitioner, the respondent authorities will proceed further recording the real extent of the land which was under occupation. the submissions made by both the 7. Having regard to learned counsel, this Court deems it appropriate to dispose of the writ petition directing the petitioner to submit a detailed explanation documents substantiating his claim over the subject extent of the subject property, within a period date of receipt of copy of this Order. After authorities concerned shall consider along with the property and also the of four(4) weeks from the such submissions, respondent the same and pass appropriate orders, after providing opportunity of hearing to the petitioner, within a period of four(4) weeks thereafter . With the above direction, the Writ Petition is disposed of. 8 There shall be no order as to costs. application, pending, if any, shall As a sequel miscellaneous also stand closed. Sd/- A.VIJAYA BABU ASSISTANT REGISTRY //TRUE COPY// OFFICER SE To, 1. The Principal Secretary Panchayat Raj Department, State of Andhra Pradesh, Secretariat, velagapudi, Amaravati. department. State of Andhra 2 The Principal Secretary, Revenue Pradesh, Secretariat, Velagapudi, Amaravati 3. The District Collector, Srikakulam , Srikakulam District. Divisional Officer, Palasa , Srikakulam district 4. The Revenue 5. The Tahsildar, Mandasa Mandal, Srikakulam District 6. Village Revenue Officer, Haripuram Gram panchayat Mandasa Mandal , Srikakulam District. Panchayat, Haripuram ^ Haripuram Gram 7. The Panchayat Secretary Village, Mandasa mandal, Srikakulam District. One CC to Sri Chintapalli Srinivas, Advocate [OPUC] 8 ZPP, MPP & Gram Rao, SC for CC to Sri Y. Koteswara 9. One Panchayat[OPUCl GP for Panchayat Raj and Rural Development, High Court 10.Two CCs to of Andhra Pradesh [OUT] GP for Revenue, High Court of Andhra Pradesh [OUT] 11 .Two CCs to 12.Two CD Copies. ssb • 4^ HIGH COURT DATED:31/07/2025 ORDER WP No.20004 OF 2025 DISPOSING OF THE W.P. WITHOUT COSTS