1 RRR,J & Dr. KMR,J W.A.No.258/2025 APHC010077232025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3525] MONDAY, THE SEVENTH DAY OF APRIL TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE R RAGHUNANDAN RAO THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE K MANMADHA RAO WRIT APPEAL NO: 258/2025 Between: M Latha Alias M.r.latha ...APPELLANT AND The State Of Ap and Others ...RESPONDENT(S) Counsel for the Appellant: 1. J M NAIDU Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. S V MUNI REDDY 2. GP FOR REVENUE The Court made the following JUDGMENT: (per Hon’ble Sri Justice R. Raghunandan Rao) Heard Sri J.M. Naidu, learned counsel appearing for the appellant, learned G.P. for Revenue appearing for respondents 1 to 3 and Sri S.V. Muni Reddy, learned counsel appearing for respondent No.4. 2. The 4th respondent had approached this Court by way of W.P.No.21512 of 2024 contending that an extent of Ac.1.47 cents in 2 RRR,J & Dr. KMR,J W.A.No.258/2025 Sy.No.269/5 of Govindareddipalle Village, Thavanampalle Mandal, Chittoor District, is Government Poramboke land, which is described as cart track and Vagu Poramboke. The 4th respondent contended that this land is under encroachment and lot of bushes and trees had come up in the said land and there is every necessity of clearing the encroachments. The petitioner contended that steps were not being taken by the Tahsildar for clearing the encroachments, despite various requests, and sought a direction from this Court to the Tahsildar to clear such encroachments. 3. A learned Single Judge of this Court by an order, dated 27.09.2024, had directed the official respondents to remove all the encroachments and to evict the encroachers within a period of six weeks from the date of the order. 4. Aggrieved by the same, the appellant herein, who is 4th respondent in the writ petition, has filed the present writ appeal with leave. 5. The case of the appellant is that the land in question is actually a water channel and the Tahsildar, under the shield of the orders of this Court, had created a case against the appellant that she is in encroachment of the subject land and had issued a notice under the Land Encroachment Act, 1905. The appellant contends that the land in question is actually a water channel and the same needs to be observed. 6. After some discussion, both the learned counsel for the appellant and learned counsel appearing for the respondent admitted and agreed that 3 RRR,J & Dr. KMR,J W.A.No.258/2025 the said land should be left as a water channel and that no encroachment to the said land should be permitted. 7. The photographs produced by the appellant also show that the area is low lying area, with naturally formed embankment and the same can only be a water channel. 8. Accordingly, this writ appeal is disposed of with a direction to the 3rd respondent to maintain the said water channel and to ensure that there is no encroachment into the said water channel. The discrepancy in the records showing this land as Kalava Poramboke as well as Bandi Poramboke, is hereby resolved with a direction to the Tahsildar to maintain it as water channel. There shall be no order as to costs. As a sequel, pending miscellaneous applications, if any, shall stand closed. ________________________ R. RAGHUNANDAN RAO, J. ________________________ Dr. K. MANMADHA RAO, J Js 4 RRR,J & Dr. KMR,J W.A.No.258/2025 HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE R. RAGHUNANDAN RAO & HON’BLE DR. JUSTICE K. MANMADHA RAO WRIT APPEAL No:258 of 2025 (per Hon’ble Sri Justice R. Raghunandan Rao) 07th April, 2025 Js