% APHC010410492021 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) I |o i- % X \ ’ MONDAY, THE FOURTEENTH DAY OF JULY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIV^ PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE T.C.D.SEKHART^ 45 3-; • ; M. A. 'T WRIT PETITION NO: 25358 OF 2021 Between: 1. Puvvala Subba Rao, @ Subbaiah, S/o. Balarama Murthy, aged about 40 years, R/o. Gangavaram Village, K.Gangavaram Mandal, East Godavari District. 2. Nangi Satyanarayana, S/o. Ammiraju, aged about 55 years, R/o. Gangavaram Village, K.Gangavaram Mandal, East Godavari District. 3. Nakka Veera Babu, S/o. Satyanarayana, aged about 31 years, R/o.Gangavaram Village, K.Gangavaram Mandal, East Godavari District. 4. Teeramsetti Veera Babu, S/o.Veerraju, aged about 55 years, R/o.Gangavaram Village, K.Gangavaram Mandal, East Godavari District. 5. Ganisetti Satyanarayana, S/o.Pentaiah, aged about 56 years, /R/o.Gangavaram Village, K.Gangavaram Mandal, East Godavari District. / 2 ...Petitioners AND 1. State of Andhra Pradesh, Rep. by its Principal Secretary, Revenue Department, Secretariat, Velagapudi, Amaravati. 2. The District Collector, East Godavari District, at Kakinada. 3. The Revenue Divisional Officer District. 4. The Tahsildar, K.Gangavaram, East Godavari 5. The Mandal Revenue Inspector, K.Gangavaram 6. Vanum Chandra Manikanta Subramanya about 30 years, Occ. Cultivation Village, K. Gangavaram Mandal (R6 is impleaded as per the Court Order dated 14.07.2025 2 of 2022 in Writ Petition and Affidavit) Ramachandrapuram, East Godavari District. , East Godavari District S/o. Satyanarayana, Aged m. R/o. D. No.5-141, Gangavaram East Godavari District in lA. No. ...Respondents Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying that in the the High Court may be or Direction more particularly declaring the Notices issued by the 3 of Madras Act, 1905. whereby the land an extent of 1/2 cent each circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, pleased to issue an appropriate Writ, Order in nature of Writ of Mandamus one Respondent No.4 under section 6 of the Act ordered for eviction of the Petitioners from total comes to Ac.0.2 1/2 cents covered by Sy.No.601-1 of Gangavaram Village, K.Gangavaram Mandal, East Godavari District, and the action of the Respondents in trying to demolish the Vinayaka Temple situated in Sy.No.601-1 of Gangavaram Village, K.Gangavaram Mandal, East Godavari District, as arbitrary, illegal unconstitutional, against to principles of natural justice, and contrary to the provisions of A.P. Land Encroachment Act lA NO: 1 OF 7091 Petition under Section 151 CPC in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, direct the Respondents not dispossess extent of Ac.0.2 1/2 cents praying that in the circumstances stated r the High Court may be pleased to the Petitioners from the lands and not to demolish the Vinayaka Temple respectively covered by Sy.No. 106-1, Gangavaram Village, K.Gangavaram Mandal, East Godavari District, pending disposal of the above writ petition an lA NO: 1 OF 2022 Between: Pradesh, Rep. by its Principal Secretary, Revenue 1. State of Andhra Department, Secretariat, Velagapudi, Amaravati. East Godavari District, at Kakinada. Ramachandrapuram, East Godavari 2. The District Collector 3. The Revenue Divisional Officer District. 4. The Tahsildar, K.Gangavaram, East Godavari District. 5. The Mandal Revenue Inspector, K.Gangavaram, East Godavari District .. .Petitioners/Respondents AND . Puvvala Subba Rao, @ Subbaiah, S/o. Balarama Murthy, aged about Village, K.Gangavaram Mandal, East 40 years, R/o. Gangavaram Godavari District. S/o. Ammiraju, aged about 55 years, R/o. Mandal, East Godavari District. 2. Nangi Satyanarayana Gangavaram Village, K.Gangavaram 3. Nakka Veera Babu, S/o. Satyanarayana, aged about 31 years, Mandal, East Godavari R/o.Gangavaram Village, K.Gangavaram District. 4. Teeramsetti Veera Babu, S/o.Veerraju, aged about 55 years, Mandal, East Godavari R/o.Gangavaram Village, K.Gangavaram District. 5. Ganisetti Satyanarayana, S/o.Pentaiah, R/o.Gangavaram Village, K.Gangavaram District. aged about 56 years, Mandal, East Godavari Respondents/Petitioners 6 Vanum Chandra Manikanta Subramanyam, S/o. Satyanarayana, Aged about 30 years, Occ. Cultivation, R/o. D. No.5-141, Gangavaram Village. K. Gangavaram Mandal, East Godavari District ...Respondent/Respondent (R6 is impleaded as per the Court Order dated 2 of 2022 in Writ Petition and Affidavit) 14.07.2025 in lA. No. Petition under Section 151 CPC in the affidavit fiied in support of the petition, the High Court may be pieased to vacate the interim order Dt.08-10-2021 praying that in the circumstances stated passed in WP.No.25358 of 2021 and dismiss the Writ Petition lA NO: 3 OF 2029 Between: Vanum Chandra Manikanta Subramanyam, S/o. Satyanarayana, Aged about 30 years, Occ. Cultivation, R/o. D. No.5-141, Gangavaram Village, K. Gangavaram Mandal, East Godavari District ...Petitioner/e*’’ Respondent AND 1. Puvvala Subba Rao, @ Subbaiah, S/o. Balarama 40 years, R/o. Gangavaram Village, K.Gangavaram Mandal, East Godavari District. Murthy, aged about 2. Nangi Satyanarayana, S/o. Ammiraju aged about 55 years, R/o. East Godavari District. Gangavaram Village, K.Gangavaram Mandal 3. Nakka Veera Babu, S/o. Satyanarayana, aged about 31 years, Mandal, East Godavari R/o.Gangavaram Village, K.Gangavaram District. 4. Teeramsetti Veera Babu, R/o.Gangavaram Village, K.Gangavaram District. S/o.Veerraju, aged about 55 years, Mandal, East Godavari 5. Ganisetti Satyanarayana, S/o.Pentaiah, aged about 56 R/o.Gangavaram Village, K.Gangavaram Mandal, East Godavari District. years. ...RespondentsA/Vrit Petitioners 6. State of Andhra Pradesh, Rep. by its Principal Secretary, Revenue Department, Secretariat, Velagapudi, Amaravati. 7. The District Collector, East Godavari District, at Kakinada. 8. The Revenue Divisional Officer, Ramachandrapuram, East Godavari District. 9. The Tahsildar, K.Gangavaram, East Godavari District. 10. The Mandal Revenue Inspector, K.Gangavaram, East Godavari District ...Respondents/Respondents 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 vacate the interim orders passed in W.P No;25358 of 2021, dated 08.10.2021 which has been extended from time to time Counsel for the Petitioners: SRI BOLLA VENKATA RAMA RAO / Counsel for the Respondents No.1 to 5: GP FOR REVENUE Counsel for the Respondent No.6: SRI K RAMA KOTESWARA RAO The Court made the following order; APHC010410492021 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) MONDAY,THE FOURTEENTH DAY OF JULY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE T.C.D.SEKHAR WRIT PETITION NO: 25358/2021 [3505] Between: 1.PUWALA SUBBA RAO, @ SUBBAIAH ■ S/O.BALARAMA MURTHY, AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS, R/O.GANGAVARAM VILLAGE, K.GANGAVARAM MANDAL, EAST GODAVARI DISTRICT. 2.NANGI SATYANARAYANA,, S/O.AMMIRAJU, AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS, R/O.GANGAVARAM VILLAGE K.GANGAVARAM MANDAL, EAST GODAVARI DISTRICT. 3..NAKKA VEERA BABU ABOUT 31 YEARS, S/O.SATYANARAYANA, AGED R/O.GANGAVARAM VILLAGE K.GANGAVARAM MANDAL, EAST GODAVARI DISTRICT. 4..TEERAMSETTI VEERA BABU ABOUT 55 YEARS S/O.VEERRAJU, AGED R/O.GANGAVARAM VILLAGE K.GANGAVARAM MANDAL, EAST GODAVARI DISTRICT. 5..GANISETTI SATYANARAYANA,, S/O.PENTAIAH AGED ABOUT 56 YEARS, K.GANGAVARARN DISTRICT. R/O.GANGAVARAM VILLAGE MANDAL, EAST GODAVARI ...PETITIONER(S) AND 2 1.STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, REVENUE DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT, VELAGAPUDI, AMARAVATI. 2.THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, EAST GODAVARI DISTRICT, AT KAKINADA. OFFICER, DIVISIONAL REVENUE 3.THE RAMACHANDRAPURAM, EAST GODAVARI DISTRICT. 4.THE TAHSILDAR, K.GANGAVARAM, EAST GODAVARI DISTRICT. 5.THE MANDAL REVENUE INSPECTOR, K.GANGAVARAM, EAST GODAVARI 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 topleased to issue an appropriate Writ, Order or Direction more particularly one in nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the Notices issued by the Respondent No.4 under section 6 of the Act 3 of Madras Act, 1905, whereby ordered for eviction of the Petitioners from the land an extent of 1/2 cent each total comes to Ac.0.2 1/2 cents covered by Sy.No.601-1 of Gangavaram Village, K.Gangavaram Mandal, East Godavari District, and the action of the Respondents in trying to demolish the Vinayaka Temple situated in Sy.No.601-1 of Gangavaram Village, K.Gangavaram Mandal, East Godavari District, as arbitrary, illegal, unconstitutional, against to principles of natural justice, and contrary to the provisions of A.P.Land Encroachment Act, and to pass lA NO: 1 OF 2021 praying that in the Petition under Section 151 CPC circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased pleased to direct the 3 Respondents not dispossess the Petitioners from the lands an extent of Ac.0.2 1/2 cents, and not to demolish the Vinayaka Temple respectively covered by Sy, No. 106-1, Gangavaram village, K.Gangavaram Mandal, East Godavari disposal of the above writ petition, and or orders as this Hon'ble Court circumstances of the case. lA NO: 1 OF 9099 District, pending to pass such other order may deem fit and proper in the Petition under Section 151 CPC circumstances stated in the affidavit filed i praying that in the, „ ... in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased pleased to vacate the interim order Dt.08-10-2021 passed in WP.No.25358 of 2021 and dismiss the Writ Petition and pass lA NO: 2 OF Petition under Section 151 CPC circumstances stated in the affidavit filed i praying that in the .... . iri support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased pleased to implead the petitioner as proposed 6th respondent in W.P No.25358 of 2021 as well as the interlocutory Applications for the case and pass proper adjudication of lA NO: 3 OF ?n9? 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 vacate the interim orders passed in W.P No:25358 of 2021 dated 08.10.2021 which has been extended from time to time and pass Counsel for the Petitioner(S); 1. BOLLA VENKATA RAMA RAO Counsel for the Respondent(S); 1.GP FOR REVENUE 4 The Court made the following order: The present writ petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking the following relief; “ ^he Notices issued by the Respondent No. 4 under section 6 of the Act 3 of Madras Act, 1905, whereby ordered for eviction of the Petitioners from the land extent of 1/2 cent each total comes to Ac. 0.2 1/2 cents covered by Sy.No.601-1 of Gangavaram Village, K.Gangavaram Mandal, East Godavari District, and the action of the Respondents in trying to demolish the Vinayaka Temple situated in Sy.No.601-1 of Gangavaram Village, K.Gangavaram Mandal, East Godavari District, arbitrary, illegal, unconstitutional, against to principles of natural justice, and contrary to the provisions of A.P.Land Encroachment Act, and to pass....” an as 2. It is the case of the petitioners that, they are in physical possession of land to an extent of 72 cent each in Sy.No.106-1 of Gangavaram Village, K Gangavaram Mandal for the past twenty (20) years. It is their further case that, the locality people constructed Vinayaka Temple in a portion of the said land about seventeen (17) years ago. While the matter stood thus, notice dated nil. was issued under Section 6 of Madras Act, 03 of 1905, to the petitioners, directing them to vacate from the subject land within a period of fifteen (15) days by affixing the same on the temple on 18.10.2021. 5 3. The main contention of the learned counsel for the petitioners is that, the petitioners are in long standing possession and enjoyment over the property in dispute and the respondents without issuing prior notice as provided for under Section 7 of Land Encroachment Act, issued notice under Section 6 of Act 3 of 1905. It is further contended that, by exercising power under Section 6 of Madras Act, 1905, the petitioners cannot be dispossessed. - 4. On the other hand, the learned Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue would fairly submit that, the notice issued under Section 6 of Madras Act is not sustainable and requested this Court to pass appropriate orders. Per contra, the counsel for 6*^ respondent would submit 5. that, despite decree dated 14.11.2014, in OS No.65 of 2012 on the file of Principal Junior Civil Judge, Ramachandrapuram, the petitioners highhandedly constructed tin shed in the middle of the road. Further he would submit that he filed Writ Petition vide WP No.5393 of 2021, and the same was disposed of by order dated 30.03.2021, directing the respondents to dispose of his 6 representation dated 22.10.2020. In view of the said order, the impugned notice was issued. Heard counsel for the petitioners, learned Assistant GovernmentPleaderfor Revenueand counsel for respondent. 6. Perused the material available on record. 7. On perusal of impugned notice, it is clear that the same is issued exercising powers under Madras Act 03 of 1905, which is admittedly not in force. Further, the respondents instead of initiating action under AP Land Encroachment Act, they resorted action against the petitioners under Madras Act 03 of 1905. Accordingly, the notice under challenge issued by the 5 respondent is hereby set aside and the writ petition is allowed. 8. th It is needless to mention that, this order 'will not preclude the 5‘^ respondent from initiating action against the petitioners in 9. accordance with law. There shall be no order as to costs. As a sequel, pending applications, if any, shall stand closed. Sd/- A VIJAYA BABU ASSISTANT REGISTRAR w SECTION OFFICER //TRUE COPY// To Revenue 1. The Principal Secretary, State of Andhra Pradesh Department, Secretariat, Velagapudi, Amaravati. 2. The District Collector, East Godavari District 3. The Revenue Divisional Officer, Ramachandrapuram, East Godavari District. 4. The Tahsildar, K.Gangavaram, East Godavari 5. The Mandal Revenue Inspector, K.Gangavaram, East Godavari District 6. One CC to SRI BOLLA VENKATA RAMA RAO Advocate 7. Tv/o CCS to GP FOR REVENUE High Court of Andhra 8. One CC to SRI RAMA KOTESWARA RAO 9. Two CD Copies at Kakinada. District. [OPUC] Pradesh [OUT] Advocate [OPUC] gsg f HIGH COURT DATED: 14/07/2025 ORDER i WP NO. 25358 OF 2021 ov g 75 SEP 2025 ^ Current Section ^ m • / ALLOWING THE WP WITHOUT COSTS