APHC010493092026 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3331] THURSDAY, THE 24th DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2026 PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE SUBBA REDDY SATTI WRIT PETITION NO: 27303/2026 Between: 1. V. VENKATESH, S/O GURAVAIAH, AGED ABOUT 41 YEARS, OCC DAILY LABOUR,DOOR NO. 16, KUMARASWAMY REDDY NAGAR. MANGALAM VILLAGE, TIRUPATHI URBAN MANDAL, TIRUPATHI DISTRICT, ERSTWHILE CHITTOOR DISTRICT. 2. G. TULASI,, W/O RAMACHANDRA AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS, OCC DAILY LABOUR, DOOR NO. 12, KUMARASWAMY REDDY NAGAR, MANGALAM VILLAGE, TIRUPATHI URBAN MANDAL, TIRUPATHI DISTRICT, ERSTWHILE CHITTOOR DISTRICT. 3. G. CHANDANA,, W/O SUBRAMANYAM, AGED ABOUT 32 YEARS, OCC DAILY LABOUR,DOOR NO.4-17H, KUMARASWAMY REDDY NAGAR, MANGALAM VILLAGE, TIRUPATHI URBAN MANDAL, TIRUPATHI DISTRICT, ERSTWHILE CHITTOOR DISTRICT. 4. M. VENKATAIAH,, . S/O. SREE RAMULU, AGED ABOUT 49 YEARS, OCC DAILY LABOUR, DOOR NO.6, KUMARASWAMY REDDY NAGAR, MANGALAM VILLAGE, TIRUPATHI URBAN MANDAL, TIRUPATHI DISTRICT, ERSTWHILE CHITTOOR DISTRICT. 5. Y. SAILAJA, , W/O T. RAMESH, AGED ABOUT 47 YEARS, OCC DAILY LABOUR,DOOR NO. 4-1, KUMARASWAMY REDDY NAGAR MANGALAM VILLAGE, TIRUPATHI URBAN MANDAL, TIRUPATHI DISTRICT, ERSTWHILE CHITTOOR DISTRICT. Page 2 of 5 6. N. AMARAVATHI,, W/O PRAKASH, AGED ABOUT 48 YEARS. OCC DAILY LABOUR, DOOR NO. 14, KUMARASWAMY REDDY NAGAR MANGALAM VILLAGE, TIRUPATHI URBAN MANDAL, TIRUPATHI DISTRICT, ERSTWHILE CHITTOOR DISTRICT. 7. P. SIVA PRASAD, S/O RAMAMOORTHY, AGED ABOUT 44 YEARS, OCC DAILY LABOUR, DOOR NO.9, KUMARASWAMY REDDY NAGAR MANGALAM VILLAGE, TIRUPATHI URBAN MANDAL, TIRUPATHI DISTRICT, ERSTWHILE CHITTOOR DISTRICT ...PETITIONER(S) AND 1. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP., BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, REVENUE DEPARTMENT SECRETARIAT BUILDINGS, SECRETARIAT, VELAGAPUDI, AMARAVATHI, GUNTUR DISTRICT. 522238 2. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, MANGALAM, TIRUPATI URBAN MANDAL, TIRUPATI DISTRICT, RAYACHOTY, ERSTWHILE CHITTOOR DISTRICT. 517507 3. THE REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER, MANGALAM, TIRUPATI URBAN MANDAL, TIRUPATI DISTRICT, ERSTWHILE CHITTOOR DISTRICT. 517507 4. THE TAHSILDAR, MANGALAM, TIRUPATHI URBAN MANDAL, TIRUPATI DISTRICT ERSTWHILE CHITTOOR DISTRICT. 517507 5. THE VILLAGE REVENUE OFFICER VRO, MANGALAM, TIRUPATI URBAN MANDAL, TIRUPATI DISTRICT, ERSTWHILE CHITTOOR DISTRICT. 517507 ...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 to issue a Writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the R-4 and R-5 in proposing to evict the petitioners without following due process of law as contemplated under Act, AP Land Encroachment Act, 1905 and later threatening and attempting to dispossess the petitioners and their family members from their living House/property subject land situated in the survey No. 47/1 admeasuring extent of land/house sites in each petitioner is,110 Square Yards of P-1,110 Square yards of P-2 0.110 Square yards of P-3, 110 square yards of P-4,110 square yards of P-5,110 square yards of P-6, situated in the Mangalam Village, Tirupati Rural Mandal, Tirupati District, Erstwhile Chittoor District without first considering the Petitioners explanation/reply submitted pursuant to the notice issued under Section 7 of the Andhra Pradesh Land Encroachment Act, 1905 as arbitrary, illegal, unreasonable and violative of Articles 14,21 and 300A of the Constitution of India and consequently direct the Respondent Authority particularly R-4 and R-5 to a) Consider the detailed Reply/explanation dated 30-07-2026 submitted by the petitioners pursuant to the Section 7 notice dated 23-07-2026, along with all supporting document materials, b) Afford to the Petitioners a reasonable opportunity of hearing and pass a reasoned and speaking order in accordance with law as prescribed under the said Act. c) That the petitioners should not dispossess from their dwelling houses, or disconnect their essential services and not to interfere with their peaceful residential possession and enjoyment by any coercive or extra-legal means IA NO: 1 OF 2026 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 direct the Respondents R-4 and R-5 not to evict the petitioners without following due process of law as contemplated under Act, AP Land Encroachment Act, 1905 and also direct not to interfere with the peaceful possession and enjoyment of the petitioners and their family members from their living House/property subject land situated in the survey No. 47/1 admeasuring extent of land/house sites in each petitioner is,110 Square Yards of P-1,110 Square yards of P-2 0.110 Square yards of P-3, 110 square yards of P-4,110 square yards of P-5,110 square yards of P-6, situated in the Mangalam Village, Tirupati Rural Mandal, Tirupati District, Erstwhile Chittoor District, Counsel for the Petitioner(S): 1. CH VENKATA SIVA SESHU BABU Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. GP FOR REVENUE The Court made the following order : Heard Sri Ch. Venkata Siva Seshu Babu, learned counsel for the petitioners; Sri Chandra Sekhar, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue, for respondents 1 to 5. 2. The petitioners, seven in number, filed the above writ petition to declare the action of respondents 4 and 5 in proposing to evict the petitioners from land/house sites admeasuring 110 Sq.yards each, situated in Survey No.47/1, Mangalam Village, Tirupati Rural Mandal, Tirupati District, Erstwhile Chittoor District, without following due process of law as illegal and arbitrary. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioners would submit that the petitioners have had their respective houses constructed in the aforementioned house sites for approximately ten years and they have been paying taxes as well as electricity charges regularly. While the matter stood thus, respondent No.4 issued notices to the petitioners under Section 7 of the Andhra Pradesh Land Encroachment Act, 1905 (for short ‘the Act’) vide Ex.P1 and the petitioners submitted explanation vide Ex.P2. However, the authority, without considering their explanation, is trying to dispossess the petitioners from their respective houses and house sites. 4. Learned Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue produced the instructions furnished by the Tahsildar, Tirupati Urban Mandal, wherein it is stated that the subject land in Survey No.47/1 is Government land and no pattas were issued in respect of the said land. The petitioners are encroachers, and hence, notices under Section 7 of the Act were issued, to which the petitioners submitted a common explanation. The authority will consider the petitioners’ explanation, Ex.P2, and pass appropriate orders after affording an opportunity of hearing to the petitioners. 5. Given the facts and circumstances of the case, without going into the merits of the matter, the writ petition is disposed of, at the stage of admission, with the consent of both the learned counsel, directing respondent No.4 to pass a reasoned order pursuant to Ex.P1 notices and Ex.P2 explanation, by affording an opportunity of hearing to the petitioners. Respondent No.4 shall complete the entire exercise as expeditiously as possible, preferably within a period of six (06) weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of the order. Till a reasoned order is passed, respondent No.4 shall not interfere with the house sites admeasuring 110 Sq.yards each situated in Survey No. 47/1, situated in Mangalam Village, Tirupati Rural Mandal, Tirupati District, Erstwhile Chittoor District. There shall be no order as to costs. As a sequel, pending miscellaneous petitions, if any, shall stand closed. ___________________________ JUSTICE SUBBA REDDY SATTI Date: 24.09.2026 IKN