APHC010709922025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3331] FRIDAY, THE TWENTY SIXTH DAY OF DECEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE SUBBA REDDY SATTI WRIT PETITION NO: 36349/2025 Between: 1. G.NAGARAJU,, S/O LATE G.RAMAYYA, AGED ABOUT 55 YRS, OCC HOTEL BUSINESS, R/O 8-695, CTM CROSS ROAD, CHINNATHIPPASAMUDRAM VILLAGE, MADANAPALLE MANDAL, CHITTOOR DISTRICT, ANDHRA PRADESH-517319. ...PETITIONER AND 1. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE, SECRETARIAT, VELAGAPUDI, A.P. 2. THE REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER, MADANAPALLE MANDAL AND TOWN, ANNAMAYYA DISTRICT, ANDHRA PRADESH. 3. THE TAHSILDAR, MADANAPALLE MANDAL, ANNAMAYYA DISTRICT, ANDHRA PRADESH. 4. THE PANCHAYAT SECRETARY, CHINNATHIPPASAMUDRAM VILLAGE, MADANAPALLE MANDAL, ANNAMAYYA DISTRICT, ANDHRA PRADESH. ...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 or order or direction more particularly in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring action of the Respondent No.3 and 4 in trying to evict the Petitioner from his Hotel premises, which is in the name of Amma Hotel admeasuring 138 Sq.Yards, at CTM Cross Road, Chinnathippasamudram Village, Madanapalle Mandal, Chittoor District, Andhra Pradesh-517319, in pursuant to eviction order passed by the 3rd respondent. Vide Ref No. A/14/2015, dated 06-12-2025 which is illegal, arbitrary and also against the Principal of Natural Justice and also Article 21 and 300-A of the Constitution of India and consequently set aside the eviction order passed by the respondent No.3, Vide Ref No. A/14/2015, dated 06-12-2025 and pass 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 to direct the Respondent No.3 and 4 and their staff not to dispossess the petitioner from his hotel premises, "Amma Hotel" admeasuring 140 Sq.Yards, at CTM Cross Road, Chinnathippasamudram Village, Madanapalle Mandal, Chittoor District, Andhra Pradesh-517319 and pass Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. P.VENKATA NARASIMHULU Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. GP FOR REVENUE The Court made the following: ORDER Heard Sri R.Venkatesh, learned counsel representing Sri P.V.Narasimhulu, learned counsel for the petitioner, Sri B.V.Satyanarayana, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue for respondents 1 to 3 and Sri M.Sudheer, learned standing counsel for the 4th respondent. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the order under Section 6 of the Andhra Pradesh Land Encroachment Act, 1905 (for short “the Act”) vide Ref.No.A/14/2025, dated 06.12.2025 (Ex.P1) was passed by the 3rd respondent without issuing any notice under Section 7 of the Act. He would also submit that against the order under Section 6 of the Act, an appeal would lie to the Revenue Divisional Officer under Section 10 of the Act and the statute provides 60 days time to file the appeal. He would submit that even though the petitioner is entitled to file appeal on or before 06.02.2026, before expiry of the appeal period, the respondents 3 and 4 are trying to dispossess the petitioner from the subject land, in pursuance of the order impugned. 3. Per contra, Sri B.V.Satyanarayana, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue, would fairly submit that the 60 days are provided under the statute to file an appeal. He would also submit that neither the 3rd respondent nor the 4th respondent will interfere with the subject land, in pursuance of Ex.P1 order, till the expiry of the appeal time, if the petitioner files a statutory appeal before the 3rd respondent. He would submit that after the issuance of notice only, the order impugned was passed. 4. Though the learned counsel for the petitioner advanced arguments that no notice under Section 7 of the Act was issued to the petitioner, this Court is not persuaded by the same. In fact, the petitioner can also raise such a contention before the appellate authority. Section 10 (1) of the Act prescribes 60 days to file an appeal against the order passed under Section 6 of the Act. In the case at hand, the impugned order was passed on 06.12.2025 and the limitation to file the appeal is upto 06.02.2026. 5. Given the facts and circumstances of the case, the Writ Petition is disposed of at the admission stage with the consent of learned counsel on either side, directing the respondents 3 and 4 not to dispossess the petitioner from the subject land, in pursuance of the impugned order vide Ref.No.A/14/2025, dated 06.12.2025 (Ex.P1), till the expiry of appeal time under Section 10(1) of the Act. If the petitioner files appeal within the limitation period, the 2nd respondent shall consider the appeal and pass appropriate orders strictly as per law. It is also made clear that if the petitioner files any interlocutory applications, the learned 2nd respondent shall also consider the same and pass appropriate orders. No order as to costs. As a sequel, pending miscellaneous petitions, if any, shall stand closed. __________________________ JUSTICE SUBBA REDDY SATTI PVD