IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH :: AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) TUESDAY, THE TWENTY SECOND DAY OF APRIL TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE VENKATESWARLU NIMMAGADDA WRIT PETITION NO: 10082 OF 2025 Between: Pilla Rupakala, W/o Pilla Suresh, aged 30 years, R/at D. No. 5-21, B.C. Colony, Vepagunta, Pendurthi Mandal, Visakhapatnam District. ...Petitioner AND 1. The State of Andhra Pradesh, Rep. by its Principal Secretary (Revenue Department), Secretariat Buildings, Velagapudi, Amaravati, Guntur District, Andhra Pradesh. 2. The Tahsildar, Pendurthy Mandal, Visakhapatnam. ...Respondents 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 Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of Respondent No. 2 herein in issuing notice vide Rc. No. 25/2025/A dated 10.01.2025 under Section 7 of the Andhra Pradesh Land Encroachment Act, 1905 pertaining to my house vide Door No. 5-21, in Sy. No. 75 of the Vepagunta Revenue Village as high handed, illegal, arbitrary, violative of principles of natural justice and contrary to the Article 300-A of the Constitution of India by setting aside the notice vide Rc. No. 25/2025/A dated 10.01.2025 under Section 7 of the Andhra Pradesh Land Encroachment Act, 1905 pertaining to my house vide Door No. 5-21, in Sy. No. 75 of the Vepagunta Revenue Village Accounts issued by the Respondent No. 2 and consequently direct Jhe Respondent No. 2 herein not to interfere with my peaceful possession and enjoyment over my house vide Door No. 5-21, in Sy. No. 75 of the Vepagunta Revenue Village. lA 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.2 herein not to interfere with my peaceful possession and enjoyment over my house vide Door No.5-21, in Sy. No.75 of the Vepagutta Revenue Village. Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI. A S C BOSE Counsel for the Respondents: GP FOR REVENUE The Court made the following order: 1 APHC010193342025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3329] TUESDAY ,THE TWENTY SECOND DAY OF APRIL TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE VENKATESWARLU NIMMAGADDA WRIT PETITION NO: 10082/2025 Between: ...PETITIONER Pilla Rupakala AND ...RESPONDENT(S) The State Of Andhra Pradesh and Others Counsel for the Petitioner: 1.ASCBOSE Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1.GP FOR REVENUE The Court made the following ORDER: This writ petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India claiming the following relief: "to issue a Writ Order or Direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of Respondent No 2 herein in issuing notice vide Rc No 25/2025/A dated 10.01.2025 under Section 7 of the Andhra Pradesh Land Encroachment Act, pertaining to my house vide Door No. 521 in Sy No. 75 of the Vepagunta Revenue Village as high handed illegal arbitrary violative of principles of natural justice and contrary to the Article 300A of the Constitution of India by setting aside the notice vide Rc.N0.25/2025/A dated 1. 1905 2 /age /lccoua?s /ssuetf fty f/,e Respondent No 2 consequently direct the Respondent No interfere with Revenue ' and herein not to o^er my house 1“nTsTI^Tn Vepagunta Revenue Village and pass order 2. Heard the learned Government Pleader for Revenue The learned absolute owner and No. 75 of the Vepagunta counsel for the petitioner and the learned Assistant appearing for the respondents, counsel for the petitioner submits 3. that the petitioner is the possessor of the RCC building bearing No. 5-21 in Sy. Revenue accounts. The petitioner has property for more than four decades been in continuous possession of the subject has been and paying property taxes to the municipal authorities. While things stood thus, the respondent No.2 issued herein iimpugned notice dated 10.01.2025 under section T of the Andhra Pradesh Land Encroachment Act, encroached the subject land in sy.No.75 of 1905 stating that the petitioner has the Vepagunta Revenue yards. Pursuant to the i accounts more particularly to an extent of 65 square issued by the 2'""' impugned notice dated 10.01.2025 i respondent, the petitioner submitted reply to the 2'"'^ respondent dated reply/explanation submitted by the 24.03.2025. sEven after receipt of the petitioner pursuant to the i 2'"'^ authorities are trying to i impugned notice, without considering the same the peaceful possession and to demolish the petitioner’s house writ petition. interfering with the enjoyment of the subject property and trying in the said land, which iIS contrary to law. Hence the On the other hand, learned Government Pleader for Revenue, supported the action of the 4*'' respondent in issuing the impugned notice after of the nature of land and occupation without any valid 4. determination permission from the competent authority and also assessed in all respects and requested to dismiss the writ petition. 5. Even assuming for a moment that this petitioner is an encroacher, who is allegedly in unauthorized possession of the property, still after issuing notice under Section 7 of the A.P. Land Encroachment Act, the respondent/ Tahsildar is required to pass detailed order after affording opportunity reasonably to the petitioner, as held in the case Kadiyala Sudershan and others Vs. Government of Andhra PradeshL 6. Section 7 of the Act envisages a show-cause notice pre- supposes that the competent authority has to deal with the explanation/objecti ons filed by the person in possession of the land. Unless a reasoned order is passed, the person in occupation of the land does not know as to why an order of eviction is passed against him. Unless the order contains reasons, the appellate authority will not be in a position to examine the validity or otherwise of the order and decide the appeal. 7. Having regard to the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue appearing for the respondents submits that, this court is of the considered ^ 1 2013 (6) ALT 42 view that, the present writ petition consider the can be disposed of by directing reply/explanation dated impugned notice dated Land Encroachment Act the 2^^ respondent to the petitioner 24.03.2025 submitted by pursuant to the i 7 of the Andhra Pradesh orders within two (02) 10.01.2025 under section 1905, and pass appropriate fTionths thereafter, any coercive steps In the meanwhile, the against the petitioner. respondents are directed not to take 8. With the above direction. Consequently, miscellaneous petitions Writ petition Is disposed of. No costs. pending, if any, shall also stand closed. //true COPY// dep1?Iy*reg[strar To. O 1- The Principal Pradesh, ‘ Andhra Pradesh. 2- The Tahslld 3- OneCCto 4- TwoCCsto 5- Three CD Copies SECTION OFFICER Department), state of Andhra e'agapudUmaravatl, Guntur District, Secretary (Revenue Secretariat Buildings PendurthyMandal.Visakhapatnam. Sri. A S C ar. Bose Advocate fOPUcj GP For Revenue Lligh Court Of Andh ra Pradesh. fOUTJ GSC HIGH COURT DATED:22/04/2025 ORDER WP.No.10082 of 2025 DISPOSING THE WP WITHOUT COSTS