APHC010514702025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3330] FRIDAY,THE TWENTY SIXTH DAY OF SEPTEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE TARLADA RAJASEKHAR RAO WRIT PETITION NO: 26614/2025 Between: 1. GEJJA MASTHANAMMA, NB ...PETITIONER AND 1. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, BN ...RESPONDENT 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 to issue a Writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the respondents in treating the petitioner‟s assigned land in Sy.No.56/2 and 57/7 to an extent of Ac.1.04 cents of Billapadu Village as government poramboke land, issuing notice under Section 7 of the A.P.Land Encroachment Act, 1905, and entering into the land and removing trees and attempting to lay a road without passing order under Sec 6 of A.P.Land Encroachment Act, 1905 without following due process of law, as illegal, arbitrary and violative of Articles 14,21 and 300A of the Constitution of India and consequently direct the respondents not to interfere with the peaceful possession and enjoyment of the petitioner‟s land and pass such other order or orders… 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 Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. C VAMSI KRISHNA Counsel for the Respondent: 1. 2 THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE TARLADA RAJASEKHAR RAO WRIT PETITION No.26614 of 2025 ORDER:- The present Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking the following relief: “…to issue a Writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the respondents in treating the petitioner‟s assigned land in Sy.No.56/2 and 57/7 to an extent of Ac.1.04 cents of Billapadu Village, as government poramboke land, issuing notice under Section 7 of the A.P.Land Encroachment Act, 1905, and entering into the land and removing trees and attempting to lay a road without passing order under Sec 6 of A.P.Land Encroachment Act, 1905 without following due process of law, as illegal, arbitrary and violative of Articles 14,21 and 300A of the Constitution of India and consequently direct the respondents not to interfere with the peaceful possession and enjoyment of the petitioner‟s land and pass such other order or orders…” 2. Heard Sri Vamsi Krishna Charupalli, learned counsel for petitioners and learned Assistant Government Pleader for revenue for respondents. 3. Learned counsel for petitioner submits that the petitioner is in continuous possession and enjoyment of the land in Sy.Nos.56/2 and 57/7 to an extent of Ac.1.04 cents of Billapadu Village, Chejarla Mandal, Sri Potti Sriramulu Nellore District, and the notice dated 29.08.2025, issued under Section 7 of the Andhra Pradesh Land Encroachment Act, 1905 (hereinafter for short referred as the „Act‟), is contrary to the judgment rendered by the Hon‟ble Apex Court in 3 Government of Andhra Pradesh v. Thummala Krishna Rao & Anr1. The petitioner has submitted representation/explanation dated 01.09.2025 and the respondents have not considered the same. 4. Learned State counsel would submit that representation/ explanation will be considered and appropriate orders will be passed. 5. 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 Irrigation2. The Division Bench of the High Court held as follows: “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.” 6. 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 1982 SCC (2) 134 2 2002 (6) ALD 83 A 4 7. Hence, the present Writ Petition is disposed of directing the respondents to examine the representation/explanation dated 01.09.2025 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, miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shall stand closed. ___________________________________ JUSTICE TARLADA RAJASEKHAR RAO Date: 26.09.2025 KBN