APHC010103892026 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3233] THURSDAY,THE TWENTY SIXTH DAY OF FEBRUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE B KRISHNA MOHAN WRIT PETITION NO: 5623/2026 Between: 1. K BALAJI, (MENTIONED AS G. BALAJI NAIDU IN THE IMPUGNED NOTICE), S/O. PURUSHOTTAM NAIDU, AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS, R/O. GOVARDHANAGIRI VILLAGE, PICHATUR MANDAL, TIRUPATI DISTRICT, ANDHRA PRADESH, PRESENTLY RESIDING AT BANGALORE, KARNATAKA. ...PETITIONER AND 1. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, REVENUE DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT, VELAGAPUDI, AMARAVATI, GUNTUR DISTRICT. 522238 2. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, TIRUPATI DISTRICT, TIRUPATI. 517501 3. THE REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER, SRIKALAHASTI DIVISION, TIRUPATI DISTRICT. 517644 4. THE TAHSILDAR, PICHATUR MANDAL, TIRUPATI DISTRICT. 517588 5. THE MANDAL REVENUE INSPECTOR, PICHATUR MANDAL, TIRUPATI DISTRICT. 517587 ...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 2 HBKM,J W.P.No.5623 of 2026 pleased topleased to issue a Writ, Order or Direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus, declaring the action of the 4th respondent in issuing proceedings bearing Ref. Nos. ROCA/119/2025 dated 27.11.2025 under Section 6 and notice bearing Ref. No. ROCA/119/2025 dated 27.11.2025 under Section 7 both notices are issued under Andhra Pradesh Land Encroachment Act, 1905 as illegal, arbitrary, without Jurisdiction, violative of the principles of natural justice and Articles 14, 21 and 300A of the Constitution of India, contrary to the orders passed in Writ Pettion No. 19700/2025 and consequently set aside the same and not to take any coercive steps in pursuant to the said notices and pass 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 pleased to suspend the both the proceedings bearing Ref. Nos. ROCA/119/2025 dated 27.11.2025 under Section 6 and ROCA/119/2025 dated 27.11.2025 under Section 7 both notices issued under the Andhra Pradesh Land Encroachment Act, 1905 and consequently not to take any coercive steps in pursuant to the said notices, pending disposal of the above Writ Petition, and pass Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. ANCHA PANDURANGA RAO Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. GP FOR REVENUE 3 HBKM,J W.P.No.5623 of 2026 The Court made the following Order: Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Assistant Government Pleader for the respondents. 2. This writ petition is filed questioning the notice issued under Section 6 of the Andhra Pradesh Land Encroachment Act, 1905 by the 4th respondent, dated 27.11.2025, on the ground that the petitioner occupied Ac.0.33 cents land out of Ac.7.80 cents of Govardhanagiri Village, Picchaturu Mandal, Tirupathi District, described it as Government land/Gunta Pormboku, to vacate the same within fifteen (15) days. 3. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that, in pursuance of the notice issued under Section 7 of the A.P.Land Encroachment Act, 1905 alleging that the petitioner illegally encroached upon Ac.0.33 cents of Government land/Gunta Pormboku out of Ac.7.80 cents of Govardhanagiri Village, Picchaturu Mandal, Tirupathi District, the petitioner submitted his explanation, dated 27.09.2025, which was received by them on 29.09.2025. But, without considering the same, highhandedly the 4th respondent issued the above said notice under Section 7 of the Andhra Pradesh Land Encroachment Act, 1905. Since, there is a highhanded action of the 4th respondent, this writ petition is filed. 5. On the other hand, the learned Assistant Government Pleader for the respondents submits that the 4th respondent initially issued notice on 4 HBKM,J W.P.No.5623 of 2026 17.09.2025 under Section 7 of the Andhra Pradesh Land Encroachment Act, 1905 and thereafter the above said notice was issued dated 27.11.2025 6. In view of the above said facts and circumstances, and upon rival submissions made, it is to be seen that the impugned notice of the 4th respondent, dated 27.11.2025, does not indicate the consideration of the explanation submitted by the petitioner and any due enquiry pursuant to the above said notice, dated 17.09.2025. In view of the same, the petitioner is permitted to submit his additional explanation, if any, enclosing all the necessary documents in respect of his claim, in continuation of the earlier explanation, dated 27.09.2025, received by the 4th respondent on 29.09.2025, to the above said notice of the 4th respondent dated 17.09.2025, within a period of four (04) weeks from the date of receipt of this order. On receipt of such additional explanation from the petitioner, the 4th respondent is directed to proceed with the necessary enquiry pursuant to the above said notice, strictly in accordance with law, by hearing all the parties concerned, including the petitioner and providing due opportunity and upon verification of the records appropriate decision shall be taken on its own merits as expeditiously as possible preferably within a period three (03) months thereafter. Pending above said enquiry, there shall be an order of status quo as on today, to be maintained with respect to the subject land in the above said notice of the 4th respondent, dated 17.09.2025. For the purpose of conducting the above said enquiry, the impugned order dated 27.11.2025, is set aside herewith. Uninfluenced by the same, the above said enquiry shall go on. 5 HBKM,J W.P.No.5623 of 2026 7. Accordingly, this writ petition is disposed of. Interim order if any deemed to have been vacated. There shall be no order as to costs. As a sequel, Interlocutory Applications pending, if any, shall stand closed. __________________________ JUSTICE B. KRISHNA MOHAN 26.02.2026 RMD 6 HBKM,J W.P.No.5623 of 2026 28 THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE B KRISHNA MOHAN WRIT PETITION NO: 5623/2026 26.02.2026 RMD