APHC010589192024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI WP(PIL) NO: 208 of 2024 Bench Sr.No:-45 [3483] Bandi Devarajula Reddy and others ...Petitioners Vs. State of A.P. and others ...Respondents ********** Advocate for Petitioners : Mr. N. Krishna Sai appearing vice Ms. Panguluru Rachana Advocates for Respondents : GP for Revenue GP for Irrigation GP for Endowments Mr. D. Prudhvi Teja CORAM : THE CHIEF JUSTICE DHIRAJ SINGH THAKUR SRI JUSTICE RAVI CHEEMALAPATI DATE : 8th October 2025 P C : The petitioners have highlighted the inaction on the part of the official respondents in not evicting private respondent No.11 from the land in question, which admittedly is Government land and falls between the Rekalachenu Village in Ramachandrapuram Mandal of Tirupati District and the forest. The area is called as the Gap area. 2. It appears that, in the first round of litigation, when one of the residents of the area agitated the issue in W.P.No.10336 of 2025, the learned single Judge, by way of an ex parte order, dated 01.05.2025, issued directions 2 HCJ & RC, J WP(PIL)_208_2024 to the respondents to clear the encroachments within the time specified by taking police aid. 3. An appeal was preferred vide W.A.No.599 of 2025 by respondent No.11 herein against the said ex parte order which was disposed of by virtue of judgment and order, dated 09.05.2025, wherein the order passed by the learned single Judge was modified to the extent that while considering the issue as to whether there is any encroachment, and if there was, before the same was to be removed, the appellant and others affected were directed to be granted an opportunity of being heard in accordance with law. 4. Pursuant to the passing of the aforementioned order, it appears that a show cause notice under Section 7 of the Andhra Pradesh Land Encroachment Act, 1905, was issued on 16.06.2025. Learned counsel for respondent No.11 does not have any instructions as to whether any reply to the show cause notice was submitted in his defense or not. 5. Be that as it may, a final order came to be passed under Section 6 of the Act, 1905, on 15.09.2025, directing respondent No.11 to vacate the land within a period of 48 hours from the date of service of notice. It appears that the said order has not been challenged as learned counsel for respondent No.11 has no knowledge about the same. 6. Be that as it may, in case the order, dated 15.09.2025, has attained finality and in the absence of any order passed by the High Court in 3 HCJ & RC, J WP(PIL)_208_2024 any proceedings in regard to the final order, dated 15.09.2025, the respondent authorities shall ensure that appropriate action is taken with a view to take the proceedings initiated under the provisions of the Act, 1905, to their logical conclusion. 7. The petition is, accordingly, disposed of. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous applications pending, if any, shall stand closed. DHIRAJ SINGH THAKUR, CJ RAVI CHEEMALAPATI, J kbs 4 HCJ & RC, J WP(PIL)_208_2024 169 HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE DHIRAJ SINGH THAKUR, CHIEF JUSTICE & HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE RAVI CHEEMALAPATI W.P.(PIL) No.208 of 2024 Dt: 08.10.2025 kbs