APHC010457802025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3330] MONDAY,THE EIGHTH DAY OF SEPTEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE TARLADA RAJASEKHAR RAO WRIT PETITION NO: 23333/2025 Between: 1. MUNDUNURU APPALARAJU, S/O RANGARAJU, AGED ABOUT 60 YEARS, R/O D.NO.14-284/1, GOLLALA THIMMAPURAM, NAGARAPALEM, BHEEMUNIPATNAM, VISAKHAPATNAM DISTRICT, ANDHRA PRADESH - 531163. 2. MUNDUNURU CHANDRAVATHI,, W/O APPALARAJU, AGED ABOUT 52 YEARS, R/O D.NO.14-284/1, GOLLALA THIMMAPURAM, NAGARAPALEM, BHEEMUNIPATNAM, VISAKHAPATNAM DISTRICT, ANDHRA PRADESH - 531163. ...PETITIONER(S) AND 1. THE STATE OF AP, REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, REVENUE DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT, VELAGAPUDI, AMARAVATI, GUNTUR DISTRICT. 2. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, VISAKHAPATNAM DISTRICT. 3. THE REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER, VISAKHAPATNAM DIVISION, VISAKHAPATNAM DISTRICT. 4. THE TAHSILDAR, BHEEMUNIPATNAM MANDAL, VISAKHAPATNAM DISTRICT. 5. THE STATION HOUSE OFFICER, BHEEMUNIPATNAM POLICE STATION VISAKHAPATNAM DISTRICT. 6. THE ASSISTANT ENGINEER, , A.P.E.P.D.C.L., BHEEMUNIPATNAM DIVISION, VISAKHAPATNAM 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 order, proceedings or writ more particularly one in the nature of of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the 4th respondent in issuing proceedings under Section 7 of the Andhra Pradesh Land Encroachment Act, 1905, vide Rc.No.670/2025/A dated 01.08.2025, in respect of my residential premises situated in Sy.Nos. 331, 332, 346, and 347/1 of Gollala Thimmapuram Village, Bheemunipatnam Mandal, Visakhapatnam District, as illegal, arbitrary, irrational, and violative of the principles of natural justice and the fundamental rights guaranteed under Articles 14, 21, and 300A of the Constitution of India, and contrary to the law laid down by the Honble Supreme Court in 2 Government of A.P. v. Thummala Krishna Rao, AIR 1982 SC 1081 and to consequently restrain the respondents from initiating any coercive steps for eviction without following due process of law and for other relief or reliefs that the Honourable Court may deem fit and proper in the circumstances of the case. 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 direct the respondent authorities not to take any coercive steps pursuant to the impugned notice issued under Section 7 of the A.P. Land Encroachment Act, 1905, vide Rc.No.670/2025/A, dated 01.08.2025, including eviction, demolition, or interference with the petitioner‟s possession over the subject residential property situated in Sy.Nos. 331, 332, 346, and 347/1 of Gollala Thimmapuram Village, Bheemunipatnam Mandal, Visakhapatnam District, and to pass Counsel for the Petitioner(S): 1. G V S KISHORE KUMAR Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. GP FOR HOME 2. GP FOR REVENUE 3 THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE TARLADA RAJASEKHAR RAO WRIT PETITION No.23333 of 2025 ORDER:- The present Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking the following relief: “…to issue an order, proceedings or writ more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the 4th respondent in issuing proceedings under Section 7 of the Andhra Pradesh Land Encroachment Act, 1905, vide Rc.No.670/2025/A dated 01.08.2025, in respect of my residential premises situated in Sy.Nos.331, 332, 346, and 347/1 of Gollala Thimmapuram Village, Bheemunipatnam Mandal, Visakhapatnam District, as illegal, arbitrary, irrational, and violative of the principles of natural justice and the fundamental rights guaranteed under Articles 14, 21, and 300A of the Constitution of India, and contrary to the law laid down by the Hon‟ble Supreme Court in Government of A.P. v. Thummala Krishna Rao, AIR 1982 SC 1081 and to consequently restrain the respondents from initiating any coercive steps for eviction without following due process of law and for other relief or reliefs…” 2. Heard learned counsel for petitioners and learned counsel for respondents. 3. It is asserted in the affidavit filed in support of the writ petition that the 4th respondent issued show cause notice vide Rc.No.670/2025/A dated 01.08.2025, under Section 7 of the Andhra Pradesh Land Encroachment Act, 1905 (hereinafter for short referred as the „Act‟) alleging that the petitioner has unauthorizedly occupied Ac.0.27 cents in Survey Nos.331, 332, 346 and 347/1 situated in 4 Gollala Thimmapuram, Bheemunipatnam Mandal, Visakhapatnam District. Pursuant to the said notice, the 1st petitioner has submitted explanation on 11.08.2025. Without considering the explanation offered by the 1st petitioner, the respondents are trying to evict/dispossess the petitioners from house property. 4. Learned State counsel would submit that the explanation offered by the petitioners will be considered in accordance with law. 5. The procedure contemplated under Section 6 of the Act is to hold a summary inquiry into the facts of the case, means not to evict forcibly without taking into consideration the explanation offered by the encroachers. 6. To fortify the said contention, this Court places reliance on the judgment of the common High Court of Andhra Pradesh in the case of Pre.Jothi Education Society vs Secretary, Major Irrigation1, the Division Bench of the High Court held in the following manner: “Since the respondents passed the order under Section 6 of the Encroachment Act on 28.4.2001 without considering the objections of the petitioner, in order to meet the ends of justice, the order passed by the respondents under Section 6 of the Encroachment Act on 28.4.2001 has to be set aside and we do so. Since we have held that the notice dated 18.4.2001 issued by the respondents under Section 7 of the Encroachment Act is a proper notice and the objections filed by the petitioner on 1 2002 (6) ALD 83 AP 5 30.4.2001 have not been considered, we permit the respondents to pass appropriate order in the light of the objections filed on 30.4.2001 by the petitioner to the Sec.7 notice, according to law. Pending a decision by the respondents as directed by us, no coercive steps shall be taken against the petitioner by the respondents.” 7. After hearing both learned counsel for the petitioner and learned State counsel, the above referred judgment is squarely applicable to the present facts of the case. 8. Hence, the present Writ Petition is disposed of directing the respondents to examine the explanation submitted by the 1st petitioner and pass appropriate orders in accordance with law and communicate the decision to the petitioners. Till the decision is taken, the respondents are directed not to take any coercive steps against the petitioners‟ property. There shall be no order as to costs. As a sequel thereto, miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shall stand closed. ___________________________________ JUSTICE TARLADA RAJASEKHAR RAO Date: 08.09.2025 KBN