APHC010116592019 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) MONDAY, THE TWENTY FOURTH DAY OF NOVEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE NINALA JAYASURYA WRIT PETITION No.5169 OF 2019 Between: 1. B.Subbhaskar Reddy, S/o.Late Penchala Reddy, Hindu, aged about 48 years, Occ: Agriculture, R/o.Venkateshwarapuram, H/o.Sangam Village and Mandal, SPSR Nellore District, and others. ...Petitioners AND 1. The State of A.P., Rep by its Principal Secretary, Revenue Department, Velagapudi, Amaravathi, Guntur District, and others. ...Respondents Counsel for the Petitioners : Mr.Narasimha Rao Gudiseva Counsel for the Respondents: G.P. for Revenue Mr.C.Subodh The Court made the following ORDER: Heard Mr.Narasimha Rao Gudiseva, learned counsel for the petitioners. Also heard Mr.K.Arjun Chowdary, learned Assistant Government Pleader representing respondent Nos.1 to 5, and Ms.B.Harika Ashok, learned counsel appearing on behalf of respondent Nos.6 to 11. 2. The present writ petition is filed seeking to declare the inaction on the part of respondent Nos.1 to 5 in initiating action against respondent Nos.6 to 11, who allegedly encroached the Government land over an extent of Acs.27.12 cents situated in Survey Nos.342 and 343 of Sangam 2 Village and thereby not allowing the way for ingress and egress to the petitioners and surrounding farmers as illegal, violative of Articles 14, 16, 19 and 300A of the Constitution of India, and for consequential directions. 3. The learned counsel for the petitioners made submissions with reference to the averments made in the affidavit filed in support of the writ petition and contends that the respondent Authorities more particularly respondent Nos.2 to 5, are under the statutory obligation to remove the encroachments in the Government lands/public properties, and in the present case, the respondent Nos.6 to 11 not only occupied the subject land of the Government but also causing inconvenience for ingress and egress to the petitioners and other farmers to reach and return from their agricultural fields. He submits that under the said circumstances, the petitioners approached this Court seeking appropriate orders. 4. The learned Assistant Government Pleader, on the other hand, while drawing the attention of this Court to the averments made in the counter affidavit filed by respondent No.5 submits that against the encroachers, action has already been initiated and the resumption orders were passed on 03.2.2016. He submits that against the said orders, aggrieved parties preferred Appeal before the respondent No.4/ Revenue Divisional Officer, Atmakur. As per the latest instructions dated 15.11.2025 furnished by the respondent No.5, enquiry has already been taken up and notices dated 04.3.2025 and 22.3.2025 were issued to the petitioners and the unofficial respondents. He submits that it appears that the appeal is being adjourned from time to time, at the request of one party or the other. Be that as it may. He submits that as the hearing of the appeal has already been taken up, the respondent No.4 would pass appropriate orders as expeditiously as possible. 3 5. Considering the said submissions, this Court, keeping in view that the appeal was filed long back, deems it appropriate to dispose of the writ petition, providing that the respondent No.4 shall pass appropriate orders strictly in accordance with law, after giving due opportunity to the petitioners and the unofficial respondents, as expeditiously as possible, at any rate, within a period of two (2) months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. 6. With the above direction, the writ petition is disposed of. No order as to costs. Miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shall stand closed. ____________________ NINALA JAYASURYA,J November 24, 2025 vasu