APHC010112362020 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3233] THURSDAY,THE TWENTIETH DAY OF NOVEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE B KRISHNA MOHAN WRIT PETITION NO: 6824/2020 Between: 1. M.S.RAMAYYA CONSTRUCTIONS PVT.LTD.,, REGD.OFFICE' AT 2- 77/A, PENDURTHI ROAD, VEPAGUNTA, VISAKHAPATNAM, A.P., REP. BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR MOGGA SITARAMAYYA, SLO.LATE VENKATA RAMANA ...PETITIONER AND 1. TTHE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, REVENUE DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT, VELAGAPUDI, AMARAVATHI, GUNTUR DISTRICT. 2. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, VISAKHAPATNAM DISTRICT, VISAKHAPATNAM 3. THE REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER, VISAKHAPATNAM DIVISION, VISAKHAPATNAM 4. THE TAHSILDAR, PENDURTHI MANDAL, VISAKHAPATNAM DISTRICT, A.P. 5. THE STATION HOUSE OFFICER, PENDURTHI POLICE STATION, VISAKHAPATNAM DISTRICT, A.P. 6. V K RISHNA RAO, S/O.VENKATA RAMANA, AGED ABOUT 74 YEARS, R/O.FLAT NO..201, DOCTORS PLAZA, OPP. ZILLA PARISHAD OFFICE. VISAKHAPATNAM, VISAKHAPATNAM DISTRICT. PERMANENT ADDRESS. H.NO.76-5-35, DEVIKA TOWERS, S-3, GANUGA VEEDHI, RAJAHMUNDRY, E.G.DISTRICT, 2 HBKM,J W.P.No.6824 of 2020 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 toto issue a writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus, declaring the action of the 4th Respondent in issuing proceedings Rc.No. 100/2020/A, dt. 20.02.2020 as illegal, arbitrary, without sanction of law, wholly without jurisdiction and violative of Articles 14 and 300A of the Constitution of India and set aside the same IA NO: 1 OF 2020 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 the 4th Respondent's proceedings in Rc.No. 100/2020/A, dt. 20.02.2020 Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. P ROY REDDY Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. GP FOR HOME (AP) 2. GP FOR REVENUE (AP) 3 HBKM,J W.P.No.6824 of 2020 The Court made the following Order: Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner, the learned Assistant Government Pleader for the respondent Nos.1 to 4 and the learned Assistant Government Pleader for the 5th respondent. Notice sent to the 6th respondent was returned with an endorsement “no such person in the said address”. 2. This writ petition was filed questioning the action of the 4th respondent in issuing the proceedings in Rc.No.100/2020/A dated 20.02.2020 requesting the 5th respondent to provide necessary police protection on 24.02.2020 at 10.00 AM to remove the unauthorized encroachments in Sy.No.46 of Purushothapuram Village of Pendurthi Mandal which is a Government land. 3. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that without conducting any enquiry and without giving any opportunity to the petitioner, whether the petitioner encroached upon the subject land or not, the 4th respondent straightaway on the complaint said to have been given by the 6th respondent and upon the Mandal Surveyors report said to have been made, issued the above said impugned letter to put against the petitioner as if Sri Mogga Seetha Ramaiah occupied the Government land in an extent of Ac.0.12 cents in Sy.No.46 of Purushothapuram Village Pendurthi Mandal. 4. He further submits that there is a Civil dispute pending between the petitioner and the 6th respondent with respect to the subject plot No.7 in an extent of 300 sq. yards in Sy.No.50/1 of Purushothapuram Village in 4 HBKM,J W.P.No.6824 of 2020 O.S.No.1286 of 2003 and batch on the file of II Additional Senior Civil Judge, Visakhapatnam and the same was disposed of vide its common judgment dated 30.03.2013, against which, the first appeal is pending before the lower appellate Court. 5. On the other hand, the learned Assistant Government Pleader relying upon the written instructions of the 4th respondent dated 15.02.2025 submits that a letter was addressed by the 4th respondent to the VMRDA dated 24.02.2020 and 05.12.2023 with a request to clarify whether any alienation was made in favour of the developer in the said layout and the developer paid the market value if any for the land in Sy.No.46 of Purushothapuram Village. But no remarks were received by the office of the 4th respondent so far. Accordingly, the further action would be taken by following the due process of law. 6. In reply, the learned counsel for the petitioner also submits that with respect to the subject land in Sy.No.46 of Purushothapuram Village a crime No.12 of 2012 was registered and it was referred ultimately by the Police as the dispute is in Civil nature, in which the 6th respondent was the complainant. Since that was failed the impugned proceedings dated 20.02.2020 was issued by the 4th respondent at the behest of the 6th respondent. 7. In view of the above said facts and circumstances and upon consideration of the rival submissions made, it is to be seen that the 4th respondent issued the impugned letter addressed to the 5th respondent to 5 HBKM,J W.P.No.6824 of 2020 provide necessary police protection to remove the encroachments in Sy.No.46 of Purushothapuram Village of Pendurthi Mandal by paying/enforcing the same against the petitioner on the complaint said to have been given by the 6th respondent. The impugned letter does not disclose any conducting of enquiry with respect to the subject encroachment if any by involving the petitioner and the 6th respondent in the said enquiry, following the due procedure. It is not the case of the learned Assistant Government Pleader appearing for the respondent Nos.1 to 4 that the enquiry was conducted against the petitioner on the complaint received from the 6th respondent for the purpose of determining the said encroachment. In view of the same, it is just and necessary to direct the 4th respondent initially to proceed with issuance of notices to the petitioner if there is any encroachment as alleged in the impugned letter dated 20.02.2020 for the purpose of conducting enquiry following the due procedure. For the said purpose, the 4th respondent is directed to issue notice to the petitioner if there is any encroachment of the subject land in an extent of Ac.0.12 cents in Sy.No.46 of Purushothapuram Village of Pendurthi Mandal by simultaneously giving notice to the 6th respondent and all others concerned. For the purpose of determining the alleged encroachment over the subject land, there shall be survey conducted afresh by the Mandal Surveyor in the presence of all the parties concerned, giving due opportunity, including the petitioner and the 6th respondent and basing upon the report of the Mandal Surveyor and if it is found that there is an encroachment, further course of action in accordance with law shall be 6 HBKM,J W.P.No.6824 of 2020 proceeded against the encroachers, giving due opportunity of hearing to all the parties concerned at all the stages before causing eviction of the encroachers. Enabling the 4th respondent to proceed with the above said issuance of notices and conducting of enquiry, the impugned letter of the 4th respondent addressed to the 5th respondent dated 20.02.2020 is set aside herewith. Necessary notices shall be issued to the VMRDA if it is also concerned for the subject land. The written instructions of the 4th respondent dated 15.02.2025 shall be made as part of the Court record. 8. 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 20.11.2025 PGT