IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) FRIDAY, THE TWENTY FIRST DAY OF MARCH TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE T.C.D.SEKHAR WRIT PETITION NO: 6786 OF 2020 Between: 1. K.Naga Raju, S/o Subba Rayudu, aged about 50 years, R/o Madakalavaripalle, Gopavaram Mandal, YSR Kadapa District. 2. K.Prabhakar, S/o Subba Rayudu, aged about 40 years, R/o Madakalavaripalle, Gopavaram Mandal, YSR Kadapa District. ...Petitioners AND 1. The State of Andhra Pradesh, Rep by its Principal Secretary, Revenue Department, Secretariat, Velagapudi, Guntur District. 2. The District Collector, YSR Kadapa District, YSR Kadapa. 3. The Tahsildar, Gopavaram Mandal, YSR Kadapa District. ...Respondents 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 writ, order or orders more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the Order in Ref.No.B/59/2020, dated 04.03.2020 (issued by the 3rd respondent directing the petitioners to evict within 24 hours from the agriculture land to an extent of Ac.0.28 cents in Sy.No.1047, Ac. 1.72 cents in Sy.No.1049 and Ac.0.02 cents in Sy.No.1053 situated at Madakalavaripalli Village, Gopavaram Mandal, YSR Kadapa District is extraneous considerations, colourable illegal, arbitrary, unconstitutional influenced by exercise of powers, apart from violative of Articles 14,21 and 300-A of the Constitution of India , set aside respondent not to evict the petitioners from the land to an extent of Ac.0.28 cents in Sy.No.1047, Ac. 1.72 cents in Sy.No.1049 and Ac.0.02 Madakalavaripalli Village, Gopavaram Mandal, YSR Kadapa District. the same and consequently direct the 3rd cents in Sy.No.1053 situated at lA NO: 1 OF 2020 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 direct the 3rd respondent not to evict the petitioners from the land to an extent of Ac.0.28 Sy.No.1049 and Ac.0.02 cents i cents in Sy.No.1047, Ac. 1.72 cents in in Sy.No.1053 situated at Madakalavaripalli Village, Gopavaram Mandai, YSR Kadapa District by suspending in Ref.No.B/59/2020, dated 04.03.2020 issued by the 3rd respondent pending disposal of the above writ petition. the Order Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI. DODDAKA Counsel for the Respondents: GP FOR REVENUE The Court made the following order: HARSHA VARDHAN APHC010110992020 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3505] FRIDAY ,THE TWENTY FIRST DAY OF MARCH TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE T.C.D.SEKHAR WRIT PETITION NO: 6786/2020 Between: ...PETITIONER(S) K.naga Raju, and Others AND ...RESPONDENT(S) The State Of Andhra Pradesh and Others Counsel for the Petitioner(S): 1. DODDAKA HARSHA VARDHAN Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1.GP FOR REVENUE (AP) -Hr V - The Court made the following order: It is the case of the petitioners that they made a representation dated 23.04.2015 to the 3^' respondent to grant assignment patta in their favour. Pursuant to their representation, respondent directed the Mandal Revenue Inspector, Mandal Surveyor and Village Revenue Officer to conduct an enquiry and submit a report. In pursuance of the same, a report submitted to the 3^'* respondent stating that the petitioners entitled to grant patta. Despite the said recommendation made by the Revenue Authorities, no patta was granted but nevertheless, it is averred in the affidavit filed in support of the writ petition that the petitioners are in possession of land admeasuring an extent of Ac.0.28 cents in Sy.No.1047, Ac.1.72 Sy.No.1049 and Ac.0.02 cents in Sy.No.1053 of Madakalavaripalli Village, Gopavaram Mandal, YSR Kadapa District. 1. the 3' was are cents in It is further case of the petitioners that when their 2. request for grant of DKT patta was pending consideration, the 3' respondent issued notice dated 28.02.2020 in exercise of powers conferred under Section 7 of the Land Encroachment Act on the premise that the petitioners are in unauthorized occupation of the r to why they shall not subject lands and called for objections, as After receipt of the notice dated 28.02.2020, the be dispossessed submitted explanation dated 29.02.2020 to the sent through registered post sent through petitioners have 3'^^ respondent and the sanrie acknowledgment due. Copy of the same was with is filed along with the writ petition. registered post of the petitioners that despite receipt the 3'"* respondent passed order Land Encroachment Act, 1905 on It is further case 3. of objections dated 29.02.2020 under Section 6 of the 04.03.2020 stating that the petitioners have not submitted reply to the show cause notice. The said order dated 04.03.2020 is being impugned in the present writ petition. counsel for the petitioners and Heard learned Government Pleader for Revenue. Perused the 4. learned Assistant material available on record. clear that the 5, On perusal of the record, it is have submitted an explanation dated 29.02.2020 dated 28.02.2020 issued by the 3" petitioners pursuant to the notice is filed along with the writ the 3'^^ respondent passed impugned respondent. Proof evidencing the same petition. Despite the same order stating that no objections received from the petitioners is contrary to record. 6. Further, on perusal of the show cause notice dated 28.02.2020, it is clear that the 3^'^ respondent directed the petitioners to submit an explanation within a period of two days i.e., on or before 02.03.2020. In this connection, the learned counsel for the petitioners placed reliance on order passed by this Court in W.P.No.20226 of 2024, wherein this Court held under:- as “2. Learned Counsel for the Writ Petitioner has drawn the attention of this Court to the Impugned Notice dated 03.09.2024 (Ex.P.1). Learned Counsel for the Writ Petitioner would submit that the time that is granted for submitting an explanation is oniy seven days and providing such a short time is not only unreasonable but it is also in violation of the principles of Natural Justice. This Court has sifted through the Impugned Notice dated 03.09.2024 and finds that only seven days has been given to the Writ Petitioner to answer the aiiegations mentioned in the Notice. This Court is of the opinion that the time that was granted is inadequate and therefore, is in vioiation of the principies of Natural Justice. Accordingly, the time granted in the Impugned Notice of a period of seven days is extended by another period of four weeks from today to submit explanation to the Tahsildar (Respondent No. 4). 3. Needless to state that such ‘explanation’ submitted by the Writ Petitioner shall be objectively considered ,fyjhe Respondent No. 4 in accordance with law. I There shall be a further direction that until passing of the final order after consideration of the ‘explanation’, the Respondent No.4 shall not interfere with the peaceful possession of the Writ Petitioner. ” In the case on hand, as already stated though the petitioners have submitted an explanation dated 29.02.2020 and despite receiving the same the respondent neither considered the objections raised by the petitioners nor the same is referred to in the impugned order dated 04.03.2020. The said action of the 3'’'^ respondent in passing the impugned order is nothing but clear violation of principles of natural justice. 6. In view of the matter, the order impugned dated 04.03.2020 passed by the O'"* respondent is hereby set aside. Further, the petitioners are directed to submit fresh explanation within a period of four (04) weeks, from the date of receipt of copy of this order and thereafter, the 3'"* respondent is directed to pass appropriate orders, after affording an opportunity of being heard to the petitioners. It is made clear that, the interim order dated 17.03.2020 granted by this Court shall continue till then. 7. 8. Accordingly, the V\/rit Petition is allowed. No costs. As a sequel, miscellaneous applications pending, if any^ shall stand closed. Sd/- N NAGAMMA ASSISTANTREGISTRAR '1 //TRUE COPY// (SfleifOFFICER SE To, 1. The Principal Secretary, Revenue Department, State of Andhra Pradesh, Secretariat, Velagapudi, Guntur District. 2. The District Collector, YSR Kadapa District, YSR Kadapa. 3. The Tahsildar, Gopavaram Mandai, YSR Kadapa District. 4. One CC to Sri. Doddaka Harsha Vardhan Advocate [OPUC] 5. TwoCCsto GPforRevenue, High Court Of Andhra Pradesh. [OUT] 6. Three CD Copies GSC HIGH COURT DATED:21/03/2025 ORDER WP.No.6786 of 2020 of AND«^ C 1 2025 current section ALLOWING THE WP WITHOUT COSTS