APHC010511902025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3330] FRIDAY, THE TWENTY SIXTH DAY OF SEPTEMBER TWO TOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE TARLADA RAJASEKHAR RAO WRIT PETITION NO: 26839/2025 Between: 1. K CHINNA SWAMY REDDY, S/O. CHINNA CHENGA REDDY, AGED ABOUT 64 YEARS, R/O. DASARAPALLI VILLAGE, PENUMURU POST AND MANDAL, CHITTOOR DISTRICT - 517 126. 2. K. KRISHNA REDDY,-, S/O. CHINNA CHENGA REDDY, AGED ABOUT 80 YEARS, R/O. DASARAPALLI VILLAGE, PENUMURU POST AND MANDAL, CHITTOOR DISTRICT - 517 126. 3. K. SIVA SHANKAR REDDY, S/O. CHINNA CHENGA REDDY, AGED ABOUT 82 YEARS, R/O. DASARAPALLI VILLAGE, PENUMURU POST AND MANDAL, CHITTOOR DISTRICT - 517 126 4. P. KALPANA, W/O. P. ESWAR REDDY, AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS, R/O. DASARAPALLI VILLAGE, PENUMURU POST AND MANDAL, CHITTOOR DISTRICT - 517 126. 5. B. KRISHNAMMA, W/O. LATE B. VENKAT REDDY AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS, R/O. DASARAPALLI VILLAGE, PENUMURU POST AND MANDAL, CHITTOOR DISTRICT - 517 126. 6. P. VENKATRAMI REDDY,, P. VENKATRAMI REDDY, S/O. LATE NARASA REDDY, AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS, R/O. DASARAPALLI VILLAGE, PENUMURU POST AND MANDAL, CHITTOOR DISTRICT - 517 126. 7. P. KALPANA, W/O. K. RADHAKRISHNA, AGED ABOUT 29 YEARS, R/O. DASARAPALLI VILLAGE, PENUMURU POST AND MANDAL, CHITTOOR DISTRICT- 517 126. ...PETITIONER(S) AND 1. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REPRESENTED BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, REVENUE DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT, VELGAPUDI, GUNTUR DISTRICT, ANDHRA PRADESH. 2 2. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, CHITTOOR, CHITTOOR DISTRICT. 3. THE TAHSILDAR, PENUMURU MANDAL, CHITTOOR DISTRICT. ...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 an order, direction, writ, more particularly Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the 3rd respondent in issuing Notice dated 01.08.2025 under Section 7 of the Andhra Pradesh Land Encroachment Act III of 1905 and directed the petitioners to evict the houses otherwise the 3rd respondent will demolish the houses of the Petitioners in Sy.No.7 of Charavaganipalle Village, Penumur Mandal, Chittoor District without following procedure contemplated under law and also against the notification issued by the Government of Andhra Pradesh, vide G.O.Ms.No.63, Panchayat Raj and Rural Development (PTS-II) Department, dated 08.08.2023 as illegal, improper, unjust, arbitrary, contrary to law and violative of Principles of Natural Justice and consequently direct the Respondents not to demolish the houses of the Petitioners’ in Sy.No.7 of Charavaganipalle Village, Penumur Mandal, Chittoor District 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 suspend the operation of the Notice dated 01.08.2025 under section 7 of the Andhra Pradesh Land Encroachment Act III of 1905 issued by the Respondent No.3, forthwith, pending disposal of the above Writ Petition and pass Counsel for the Petitioner(S): 1. K VENUGOPAL REDDY Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. GP FOR REVENUE The Court made the following: 3 THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE TARLADA RAJASEKHAR RAO WRIT PETITION NO. 26839 of 2025 ORDER: The present Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking the following relief: “…to issue an order, direction, writ, more particularly Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the 3rd respondent in issuing Notice dated 01.08.2025 under Section 7 of the Andhra Pradesh Land Encroachment Act III of 1905 and directed the petitioners to evict the houses otherwise the 3rd respondent will demolish the houses of the Petitioners in Sy.No.7 of Charavaganipalle Village, Penumur Mandal, Chittoor District without following procedure contemplated under law and also against the notification issued by the Government of Andhra Pradesh, vide G.O.Ms.No.63, Panchayat Raj and Rural Development (PTS-II) Department, dated 08.08.2023 as illegal, improper, unjust, arbitrary, contrary to law and violative of Principles of Natural Justice and consequently direct the Respondents not to demolish the houses of the Petitioners’ in Sy.No.7 of Charavaganipalle Village, Penumur Mandal, Chittoor District and to pass such other order or orders as this Hon’ble Court may deem fit and proper in the interest of justice”. 2. The 3rd respondent/Tahsildar issued eviction notice dated 01.08.2025 under Section 7 of the Andhra Pradesh Land Encroachment Act, 1905 (hereinafter for short referred as the ‘Act’), directing the petitioners to submit an explanation within 15 days, as to why they should be evicted from the Government land. In pursuance of the notice dated 01.08.2025, the petitioners submitted an explanation. However, the 3rd respondent has not considered the same. Aggrieved by the same, the present writ petition is filed. 4 3. Heard Sri K.Venu Gopal Reddy, learned counsel for petitioners and learned Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue for respondents. 4. Learned counsel for petitioners submits that admittedly, the petitioners’ submitted explanation to the notice dated 01.08.2025 and it would suffice if a direction is given to the 3rd respondent to consider the explanation submitted by the petitioners and pass appropriate orders. 5. Learned Assistant Government Pleader does not refute the said submission. 6. 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 Irrigation1. The Division Bench of the High Court held in the following: “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 1 (2002) 6 ALD 83 5 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.” 7. After hearing both learned counsel for the petitioners and learned State Counsel, the above referred judgment is squarely applicable to the present facts of the case. 8. In view of the above submissions, without expressing any opinion on merits of the matter, the present Writ Petition is disposed of at the admission stage, directing the 3rd respondent to examine the explanation submitted by the petitioners and pass appropriate orders in accordance with law and communicate the decision to the petitioners as expeditiously as possible. Till such time, the 3rd respondent is directed not to take any coercive steps against subject 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 SPP 6 THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE TARLADA RAJASEKHARA RAO W.P.No. 26839 OF 2025 Date: 26.09.2025 SPP