APHC010281752026 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3521] THURSDAY,THE TWENTY FIRST DAY OF MAY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX PRESENT THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE Y. LAKSHMANA RAO WRIT PETITION NO: 14653/2026 Between: 1. SRI RAYAPU CHENCHUKRISHNAIAH, S/O. RAYAPU CHECHURAMAIAH, AGED ABOUT 47 YEARS, OCC DAILY WAGE COOLIE, RIO. CHILLAMARTHUR VILLAGE, NAIDUPETA MANDAL, TIRUPATI DISTRICT 524126 2. SRI RAYAPU SRINIVASULU, S/O. RAYAPU KOTAIAH, AGED ABOUT 48 YEARS, OCC DAILY WAGE COOLIE, RIO. CHILLAMARTHUR VILLAGE, NAIDUPETA MANDAL, TIRUPATI DISTRICT 524126. 3. SRI RAYAPU KOTAIAH, S/O. RAYAPU NARAIAH, AGED ABOUT 59 YEARS, OCC DAILY WAGE COOLIE, R/O. CHILLAMARTHUR VILLAGE, NAIDUPETA MANDAL, TIRUPATI DISTRICT 524126. 4. SRI RAYAPU SRINIVASULU, S/O. YERRA PENCHALAIAH, AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS, RIO. CHILLAMARTHUR VILLAGE, NAIDUPETA MANDAL, TIRUPATI DISTRICT 524126. 5. SRI RAYAPU VENKATESWARLU, S/O. RAYAPU VENKAIAH, AGED ABOUT 64 YEARS, OCC DAILY WAGE COOLIE, R/O. CHILLAMARTHUR VILLAGE, NAIDUPETA MANDAL, TIRUPATI DISTRICT 524126. 6. SRI DAMMAL MANAIAH, S/O. DAMMAL SUBBAIAH, AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS, OCC DAILY WAGE COOLIE, R/O. CHILLAMARTHUR VILLAGE, NAIDUPETA MANDAL, TIRUPATI DISTRICT 524126. 7. SMT. RAYAPU VENKATAMMA, W/O. RAYAPU KRISHNAIAH, AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS, OCC DAILY WAGE COOLIE, R/O. CHILLAMARTHUR VILLAGE, NAIDUPETA MANDAL, TIRUPATI DISTRICT 524126. 2 8. SRI RAYAPU PENCHALAIAH, S/O. PENCHALAIAH, AGED ABOUT 36 YEARS, OCC DAILY WAGE COOLIE, RIO. CHILLAMARTHUR VILLAGE, NAIDUPETA MANDAL, TIRUPATI DISTRICT 524126. 9. SRI RAYAPU ANKAIAH, S/O. RAYAPU PEDDA CHENGAIAH, AGED ABOUT 70 YEARS, RIO. CHILLAMARTHUR VILLAGE, NAIDUPETA MANDAL, TIRUPATI DISTRICT 524126. 10. SRI RAYAPU SHANKARAIAH, S/O. RAYAPU VENKATAIAH, AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS, OCC DAILY WAGE COOLIE, RIO. CHILLAMARTHUR VILLAGE, NAIDUPETA MANDAL, TIRUPATI DISTRICT 524126. 11. SRI RAYAPAU RAMANAIAH, S/O. NARAIAH, AGED ABOUT 31 YEARS, OCC DAILY WAGE COOLIE, RIO. CHILLAMARTHUR VILLAGE, NAIDUPETA MANDAL, TIRUPATI DISTRICT 524126. ...PETITIONER(S) AND 1. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP. BY PRINCIPAL SECRETARY (REVENUE DEPARTMENT), SECRETARIAT BUILDING, VELGAPUDI, GUNTUR DISTRICT. 2. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, TIRUPATI DISTRICT. 3. THE TAHSILDAR, NAIDUPETA MANDAL, TIRUPATI 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 to may be pleased to issue an appropriate writ more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the respondents herein in trying to demolish the existing structures i.e. houses and cattle sheds from an extent of Ac. 0-03 Cents each in Sy. No. 47, situated at Chillamarthur Village, Naidupeta Mandal, Tirupati District which is a Gramakantham Land, by approaching the subject property on 16-05-2026, under the guise of notices issued by the 3rd respondent herein vide Proceedings Rcb.375/2025 dated 20-06-2025, without passing any orders on the reply given by these petitioners dated 07-07-2025 as illegal, arbitrary, without jurisdiction and opposed to the established principles of law and consequently set aside the impugned notices issued by the 3rd respondent herein vide Proceedings Rcb.375/2025 dated 20-06-2025 and pass such 3 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 may be pleased to direct the respondents herein to not to interfere and dispossess these petitioners from the subject lands in their possession i.e. from an extent of Ac. 0-03 Cents each in Sy. No. 47, situated at Chillamarthur Village, Naidupeta Mandal, Tirupati District which is a Gramakantham Land pending disposal of the present writ petition and pass such Counsel for the Petitioner(S): 1. K PALLAVI Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. GP FOR REVENUE The Court made the following: ORDER: The Writ Petition has been filed for the following relief: “…to issue an appropriate writ more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the respondents herein in trying to demolish the existing structures i.e. houses and cattle sheds from an extent of Ac. 0-03 Cents each in Sy. No. 47, situated at Chillamarthur Village, Naidupeta Mandal, Tirupati District which is a Gramakantham Land, by approaching the subject property on 16-05-2026, under the guise of notices issued by the 3rdrespondent herein vide Proceedings Rcb.375/2025 dated 20.06.2025, without passing any orders on the reply given by these petitioners dated 07.07.2025 as illegal, arbitrary, without jurisdiction and opposed to the established principles of law and consequently set aside the impugned notices issued by the 3rd respondent herein vide Proceedings Rcb.375/2025 dated 20.06.2025 and pass such other order or orders…” 2. Heard learned counsel for the Petitioners and the learned Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue. 3. Smt. K.Pallavi, learned counsel for the Petitioners submits that the Respondents have been trying to demolish the existing structures on the 4 subject land on the ground that the land belongs to Village Panchayat which is classified as Grama Kantam land. 4. Sri T.Sanjeev Rao, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue, submits that the Petitioners have occupied the Government land that is the reason why the Tahsildar Office, Naidupeta has issued a notice on 20.06.2025 under Section 7 of the Madras Land Encroachment Act, 1905 that the Petitioners are required to vacate the land within a period of 15 days from the date of receipt of the notice. He further submits that the Respondents have not threatened to dispossess the Petitioners from the subject land and they have only followed the due process of law. 5. Having seen from the records, pursuant to the notice issued by the Respondent No.3, the Petitioners have submitted reply/explanation on 07.07.2025 stating that the subject land is a Grama Kantam land for about last 50 years and the Petitioners and their ancestors have been residing in the subject land without any problem. As seen from the schedule of the notice dated 20.06.2025, the Respondent No.3 has classified that the subject land is a Government land/Grama Kantam land. If the land is classified as Grama Kantam land, the appropriate authority to evict the Petitioners from the land is the Grama Panchayat but not the Tahsildar. The Tahsildar himself is not clear whether the subject land is a Grama Kantam land or classified as Government land. Therefore, the Petitioners are also not in a position to effectively give their explanation/reply to the notice. Hence, the impugned notice is required to 5 be set aside on the ground that it is not clear and specific as regard to its nature. 6. Having regard to the entire facts and circumstances of the case, the Writ Petition is allowed, setting aside the impugned notice dated 20.06.2025 on the ground of uncertainty. However, it is left open to the Respondent No.3 to conduct a detailed enquiry to know about the nature of the land and take appropriate steps in accordance with law. Until such procedure is undertaken, the Respondent No.3 is directed not to interfere/dispossess the Petitioners from the subject land. There shall be no order as to costs. As a sequel, miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shall stand closed. ________________________ Dr.Y. LAKSHMANA RAO, J Date: 21.05.2026 BSP/TPS 6 09 THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE Y. LAKSHMANA RAO WRIT PETITION NO: 14653 of 2026 Date: 21.05.2026 BSP/TPS