APHC010571742025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3330] TUESDAY, THE TWENTY EIGHTH DAY OF OCTOBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE TARLADA RAJASEKHAR RAO WRIT PETITION NO: 29510/2025 Between: 1. SRI KOKKILIGADDA PEDAMARIDAYYA, S/O BIKHSAM AGE 55 YEARS, OCC AGRICULTURE COOLI, D.NO. 6-89 DEENAYALAPURAM, H/O PARRICHIVARA VILLAGE, NAGAYALAKANKA MANDAL, KRISHNA DISTRICT, ANDHRA PRADESH. 2. SRIMATI KOKKILIGADDA LAKSHMI, W/O SRINIVASA RAO AGE 50 YEARS, OCC AGRICULTURE COOLI, D. NO.6-96 DEENAYALAPURAM, H/O PARRICHIVARA VILLAGE, NAGAYALAKANKA MANDAL, KRISHNA DISTRICT, ANDHRA PRADESH 3. SRI RAMANI SAMBASIVARAO, S/O VISWA BHRAHMAM AGE 50 YEARS, OCC AGRICULTURE COOLI , D.NO. 6- 75,DEENAYALAPURAM, H/O, ANDHRA PRADESH ...PETITIONER(S) AND 1. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY DEPARTMENTOF REVENUE, SECRETARIAT, VELGAPUDI, 2ND BIOCK TULLURU MANDAL, GUNTUR DISTRICT. 2. THE REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER, BANDARU DIVISION, KRISHNA DISTRICT. 3. THE TAHSILDAR, NAGAYALANKA MANDAL, KRISHNA DISTRICT. Page 2 of 7 4. THEVRO, PARRACHIVARA VILLAGE, NAGAYALANKA MANDAL, KRISHNA 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 topleased to issue an appropriate Writ, Order, or Direction, more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus, declaring the action of the respondents in interfere with peaceful position and enjoyment of petitioner without considering the explanation submitted by the petitioner dated 19/8/2025. And without passing order by offering Opportunity being heard in respect of property situated in Sy.No.758 an extent of AC. 1.57 cents of petitioner, in Sy.No.No.758 an extent of AC. 1.71 cents of 2ND petitioner and in Sy.No.No.758 an extent of AC. 0.68 cents of 3RD petitioner as issued notice U/S 7 of Land Encroachment Act Parrichivara Village, Nagayalakanka Mandal, Krishna District as illegal, arbitrary, and in violation of Article 300-A of the Constitution of India and Provisions Of AP Land Encroachment Act and against the principle of law in violation of the principles of natural justice and against all settled principles of law. And consequently direct the3 Respondent not to interfere with peaceful position and enjoyment of petitioner without considering the explanation submitted by the petitioner dated 19/8/2025. And without passing order by offering Opportunity being heard in respect of property situated in Sy.No.758 an extent of AC. 1.57 cents of 1ST petitioner, in Sy.No.758 an extent of AC. 1.71 cents of 2NDpetitioner and in Sy.No.758 an extent of AC. 0.68 cents of 3RD petitioner as issued notice U/S 7 of Land Encroachment Act Parrichivara Village, Nagayalakanka Mandal, Krishna 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 Pleased to direct the 3RD Respondent not to interfere with peaceful position and enjoyment of petitioner without considering the explanation submitted by the petitioner dated 19/8/2025. And without passing order by offering Opportunity being heard in respect of property situated in Sy.No.758 an extent of AC. 1.57 cents of 1ST petitioner, in Sy.No.No.758 an extent of AC. 1.71 cents of 2ND petitioner and in Sy.No.No.758 an extent of AC. 0.68 cents of 3RDpetitioner as issued notice U/S 7 of Land Encroachment Act Parrichivara Village, Nagayalakanka Mandal, Krishna District,, pending disposal of the main writ petition and to pass Counsel for the Petitioner(S): 1. KALLA TULASI DURGAMBA Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. GP FOR REVENUE The Court made the following: THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE TARLADA RAJASEKHAR RAO WRIT PETITION No.29510 of 2025 ORDER:- The present Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking the following relief: “…issue an appropriate Writ, Order, or Direction, more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus, declaring the action of the respondents in interfere with peaceful position and enjoyment of petitioner without considering the explanation submitted by the petitioner dated 19/8/2025. And without passing order by offering Opportunity being heard in respect of property situated in Sy.No.758 an extent of AC. 1.57 cents of petitioner, in Sy.No.No.758 an extent of AC. 1.71 cents of 2ND petitioner and in Sy.No.No.758 an extent of AC. 0.68 cents of 3RD petitioner as issued notice U/S 7 of Land Encroachment Act Parrichivara Village, Nagayalakanka Mandal, Krishna District as illegal, arbitrary, and in violation of Article 300-A of the Constitution of India and Provisions Of AP Land Encroachment Act and against the principle of law in violation of the principles of natural justice and against all settled principles of law. And consequently direct the3 Respondent not to interfere with peaceful position and enjoyment of petitioner without considering the explanation submitted by the petitioner dated 19/8/2025. And without passing order by offering Opportunity being heard in respect of property situated in Sy.No.758 an extent of AC. 1.57 cents of 1ST petitioner, in Sy.No.758 an extent of AC. 1.71 cents of 2NDpetitioner and in Sy.No.758 an extent of AC. 0.68 cents of 3RD petitioner as issued notice U/S 7 of Land Encroachment Act Parrichivara Village, Nagayalakanka Mandal, Krishna District, and pass…” 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that respondent No.3 issued a separate notices under Section 7 of the Andhra Pradesh Land Encroachment Act, 1905 (hereinafter for short referred as the ‘Act’) to the petitioners, directing them to offer explanation in respect of the properties of an extent of Ac.1.57 cents in Sy.No.758 of 1st petitioner; Ac.1.71 cents in Sy.No.758 of 2nd petitioner and Ac.0.68 cents in Sy.No.0.68 cents in Sy.No.758 of 3rd petitioner situated in Deendayalapuram Village, Nagayalanka Mandal. The petitioners have submitted their explanation on 19.08.2025 to the aforementioned notices. However, the same has not been considered. Aggrieved by the same, present writ petition is filed. 3. Heard Smt. K. Tulasi Durgamba, 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 aforementioned notices and it would suffice if a direction is given to the respondent No.3 to consider the explanation submitted by the petitioners and pass appropriate orders. 5. Learned Assistant Government Pleader does not refute the said submissions. 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 1 2002 (6) ALD 83 A 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.” 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 respondent No.3 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, respondent No.3 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: 28.10.2025 TVN 180 THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE TARLADA RAJASEKHAR RAO WRIT PETITION No.29510 OF 2025 Date: 28.10.2025 TVN