APHC010476892025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3330] MONDAY,THE FIFTEENTH DAY OF SEPTEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE TARLADA RAJASEKHAR RAO WRIT PETITION NO: 24762/2025 Between: 1. SARADHI TIRUPATHI RAO, , S/O.LATETHATA, AGED ABOUT 51 YEARS, R/O.H.NO.,1-105, RAJA VEEDHI, BHULOKAMATHA HOUSE, NARAVA VILLAGE, GANTYADA MANDAL, VIZIANAGARAM DISTRICT. ...PETITIONER AND 1. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, REVENUE DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT, VELAGAPUDI, AMARAVATI, GUNTUR DISTRICT. 2. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, VIZIANAGARAM DISTRICT, VIZIANAGARAM. 3. THE REVENUE DIVSIONAL OFFICER, VIZIANAGARAM, VIZIANAGARAM DISTRICT. 4. THE TAHSILDAR, GANTYADA MANDAL, VIZIANAGARAM 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 lssue a Writ, Order or Direction, more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus, declaring the action of the Respondent No.4 in issuing Eviction Notice vide Proceedings Rc.No.232/2025/SA, dt.23.08.2025, without proper identification or demarcation of the alleged encroached land was carried out in the presence of the petitioner, as illegal, arbitrary, unconstitutional and contrary to the Articles 14, 19, 21 and 300-A of the Constitution of India and consequently set-aside the same, 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 in pursuance of the Eviction otice vide Proceedings Rc.No.232/2025/SA, dt.23.08.2025, issued by the Respondent No.4, pending disposal of the writ petition Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. SARIPALLI SUBRAHMANYAM Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. GP FOR REVENUE 2 THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE TARLADA RAJASEKHAR RAO WRIT PETITION No.24762 of 2025 ORDER:- The present Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking the following relief: “…to issue a Writ, Order or Direction, more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus, declaring the action of the Respondent No.4 in issuing Eviction Notice vide Proceedings Rc.No.232/2025/SA, dt.23.08.2025, without proper identification or demarcation of the alleged encroached land was carried out in the presence of the petitioner, as illegal, arbitrary, unconstitutional and contrary to the Articles 14, 19, 21 and 300-A of the Constitution of India and consequently set-aside the same…” 2. The 4th respondent-Tahsildar issued eviction notice dated 23.08.2025 under Section 7 of the Andhra Pradesh Land Encroachment Act, 1905 (hereinafter for short referred as the ‘Act’) directing the petitioner to submit explanation within seven days, as to why he should be evicted from the Government land and forfeiture of buildings, constructions and things deposited therein. Challenging the said eviction notice, present writ petition is filed. 3. Heard Sri Saripalli Subrahmanyam, learned counsel for petitioner and learned Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue for respondents. 4. Learned counsel for petitioner submits that admittedly, the petitioner has not submitted any explanation to the notice and it would 3 suffice to permit the petitioner to submit explanation and respondents may be directed to consider the said explanation. 5. Learned Assistant Government Pleader does not refute the said submissions. 6. In view of the above submissions, without expressing any opinion on merits of the matter, the present Writ Petition is disposed of at the admission stage, directing the petitioner to submit explanation within ten (10) days from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. On receiving such explanation, the respondent No.4 is directed to examine the same, pass appropriate orders in accordance with law and communicate the decision to the petitioner as expeditiously as possible. Till such time, respondent No.4 is directed not to take any coercive steps against subject 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: 15.09.2025 KBN