Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Andhra Pradesh · body

2025 DAILYLAW 37040 (AP)

K VENKATA SUBBAIAH v. THE STATE OF AP

WP/36791/2022 · 2025-09-09

B Krishna Mohan

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

APHC010613962022 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3233] WEDNESDAY, THE TENTH DAY OF SEPTEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE B KRISHNA MOHAN WRIT PETITION NO: 36791/2022 Between: 1. K VENKATA SUBBAIAH, S/U. LATE PULLAIAH, AGED ABOUT 44 YEARS, R/O. KOLUMULAPALLI VILLAGE, CHINTHAKOMMA DINNE MANDAL, YSR KADAPA DISTRICT ...PETITIONER AND 1. THE STATE OF AP, REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, REVENUE DEPARTMENL, A.P. SECRETARIAT AT VELAGAPUDI, AMARAVATI, GUNTUR DISTRICT 2. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, YSR KADAPA DISTRICT 3. THE REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER, KADAPA REVENUE DIVISION, YSR KADAPA DISTRICT 4. THE TAHSILDAR, MANDAL REVENUE OFFICE, CHINTHAKOMMA DINNE MANDAL, YSR KADAPA DISTRICT ...RESPONDENT(S): Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. SODUM ANVESHA Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. GP FOR REVENUE 2 HBKM,J W.P.No.36791 of 2022 The Court made the following Order: Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Assistant Government Pleader for the respondents. 2. This writ petition was filed questioning the notice-I dated 13.06.2022 of the 4th respondent issued under Section 7 of the Andhra Pradesh Land Encroachment Act, 1905 calling the petitioner to remove the legal structures or things within 15 days on or before 28.06.2022 on the ground that the Sy.No.190/2 of Kolumulapalli Village, Chinthakomma Dinne Mandal, YSR Kadapa District is the Government land as per the schedule mentioned therein. 3. It is the case of the petitioner that he is the absolute owner of the subject land in an extent of Ac.0.11 cents in Sy.No.190/2 of the said village but not a Government land. 4. On the other hand, the learned Assistant Government Pleader appearing for the respondents submits that if the petitioner submits explanation to the impugned notice dated 13.06.2022, the same will be considered by the 4th respondent following the due procedure. 5. In view of the above said facts and circumstances, the petitioner is permitted to submit his explanation, enclosing all the necessary documents in support of his claim to the above said impugned notice of the 4th respondent dated 13.06.2022 within a period of two (02) weeks from the date of receipt of 3 HBKM,J W.P.No.36791 of 2022 this order. On receipt of such explanation from the petitioner, the 4th respondent shall proceed with the necessary enquiry, by giving due opportunity to all the parties concerned including the petitioner, upon verification of the records and the subject land, appropriate decision shall be taken on its own merits as expeditiously as possible preferably within a period of two (02) months thereafter. Pending the above said enquiry, there shall be an order of status-quo as on today to be maintained with respect to the subject land shown in the schedule of the impugned notice dated 13.06.2022 of the 4th respondent. 6. Accordingly, this Writ Petition is disposed of. Interim order if any deemed to have been vacated. There shall be no order as to costs. As a sequel, Interlocutory Applications pending, if any, shall stand closed. __________________________ JUSTICE B. KRISHNA MOHAN 10.09.2025 PGT