APHC010491302025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3330] TUESDAY, THE SIXTEENTH DAY OF SEPTEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE TARLADA RAJASEKHAR RAO WRIT PETITION No. 25033 of 2025 Between: 1. M V V AND M K HOUSING, A PARTNERSHIP FIRM, HAVING ITS OFFICE AT MW AND MK PARK, CLUB HOUSE, 2ND FLOOR, DOOR NO.31-22-28, KURMAMNAPALEM, REVENUE WARD-58, VISHAKHAPATNAM- 530046 REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING PARTNER SRI. M.V.V SATYANARAYANA. ...PETITIONER AND 1. THE STATE OF AP, REPRESENTED BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, REVENUE DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT, VELAGAPUDI, AMARAVATI, GUNTUR DISTRICT. A.P. 2. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, VISAKHAPATNAM DISTRICT. 3. THE TAHSILDAR, , GAJUWAKA MANDAL, VISAKHAPATNAM DISTRICT, A.P. ...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 the Writ of Mandamus declaring that the action of the 3RD Respondent in trying to interfere with the Petitioner's peaceful possession and enjoyment over the subject property i.e. residential project situated at Sy.No.52-5C, 58-3, 59-1B, 60-1, 60-6, Situated in Zone 5, Kurmannapalem, Mw Mk Street/Colony, within the Greater Vishakhapatnam Municipal Corporation Limits, A.P, consisting of 6 number of fully completed residential building/s and 2000 number of residential flat/s, without passing any order under Section 6 of the Andhra Pradesh Land Encroachment Act, 1905, by considering the Petitioner's representation dated 08.09.2025 in response to the Eviction 2 Notice vide Rc.No.621/2025/SA dated 28.08.2025 issued by the 3RD Respondent as illegal, arbitrary, irrational, without jurisdiction and contrary to the provisions and the procedure contemplated under the Andhra Pradesh Land Encroachment Act, 1905, besides being violative of principles of Natural Justice, violative of Article 14, 19, 21 and 300A of the Constitution of India and consequently direct the 3RD Respondent herein not interfere with the Petitioner's peaceful possession and enjoyment of the subject property i.e., situated in at Sy.No.55-3 of MW MK Street/Colony, Kurmannapalem area, within the Greater Vishakhapatnam Municipal Corporation Limits, Vishakhapatnam, A.P without following the due process of law and to pass… Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. CKR ASSOCIATES Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. GP FOR REVENUE The Court made the following: 3 ORDER: The present Writ Petition is filed seeking to declare the action of the 3rd respondent in trying to interfere with the petitioner's peaceful possession and enjoyment over the subject property, i.e., residential project situated at Sy.No.52-5C, 58-3, 59-1B, 60-1, 60-6, situated in Zone 5, Kurmannapalem, Mvv Mk Street/Colony, within the Greater Vishakhapatnam Municipal Corporation Limits, A.P, consisting of 6 number of fully completed residential building and 2000 number of residential flat, without passing any order under Section 6 of the Andhra Pradesh Land Encroachment Act, 1905, by considering the petitioner's representation dated 08.09.2025 in response to the Eviction Notice vide Rc.No.621/2025/SA dated 28.08.2025 issued by the 3rd Respondent as illegal, arbitrary, irrational, without jurisdiction and contrary to the provisions and the procedure contemplated under the Andhra Pradesh Land Encroachment Act, 1905, besides being violative of principles of Natural Justice, violative of Article 14, 19, 21 and 300A of the Constitution of India and consequently direct the 3rd Respondent herein not interfere with the Petitioner's peaceful possession and enjoyment of the subject property i.e., situated in at Sy.No.55-3 of MVV MK Street/Colony, Kurmannapalem area, within the Greater Vishakhapatnam Municipal Corporation Limits, Vishakhapatnam, A.P without following the due process of law. 2. Precisely, the Writ Petition is filed on the ground that without considering the explanation offered by the petitioner, the present impugned notice came to be issued under Section 7 of A.P. Land Encroachment Act, 1905 (for short Act). 4 3. The procedure contemplated under Section 6 of the Act, 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. To fortify the said contention, this Court places reliance of 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: “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 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.” 4. 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. 1 2002 (6) ALD 83 AP 5 5. The Court has determined that it is appropriate to consider the Writ Petition at the admission stage with the consent of both parties. 6. The present impugned order came to be passed under Section 6 of the A.P.Land Encroachment Act without considering the explanation submitted by the petitioner to the notice issued under Section 7 of the Act. 7. Therefore, the present Writ Petition is disposed of, directing the respondents to examine the explanation submitted by the petitioner and pass appropriate orders in accordance with law and communicate the decision to the petitioner. Till the decision is taken, the respondents are directed not to take any coercive steps against the petitioner’s property. There shall be no order as to costs. As a sequel thereto, Interlocutory Applications pending, if any, shall stand closed. __________________________________ JUSTICE TARLADA RAJASEKHAR RAO Date: 16.09.2025 siva 6 THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE TARLADA RAJASEKHAR RAO WRIT PETITION No.25033 of 2025 Date: 16.09.2025 siva