APHC010720122025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3208] MONDAY,THE FIFTH DAY OF JANUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE D RAMESH WRIT PETITION NO: 18/2026 Between: 1. GONNA POOJITHA HANEESHA, D/O. LATE G. B. NAIDU, AGED ABOUT 28 YEARS, RIO. D. NO.7-36, GONNAVANIPALEM VILLAGE, PARAWADA MANDAL, ANAKAPALLI DISTRICT. 2. GONNA GOPI,, S/O. APPALAKONDA, AGED ABOUT 42 YEARS, OCC AGRICULTURE, R/O. 7-32, GONNAVANIPALEM VILLAGE, PARAWADA MANDAL, ANAKAPALLI DISTRICT. ...PETITIONER(S) AND 1. THE STATE OF AP, REP. BY ITS PRL. SECRETARY REVENUE DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT BUILDING, AMARAVATHI 2. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, ANAKAPALLI DISTRICT.. 3. THE TAHSILDAR, PARAVADA MANDAL, ANAKAPALLI 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 topleased to issue a writ or order more particularly one in the nature writ of mandamus or an appropriate writ or order declaring the proceedings in Rc. No. 94/2025/C, dt. 16-12-2025 passed by the 3rd respondent u/s. 6 of the Land Encroachment Act, whereunder directed the petitioners to remove the houses alleged to have situated in Sy. No. 70/1, which was classified as a Gedda Poramboke land of E. Marripalem village, Parawada mandal, Anakapalli District, is illegal, arbitrary and unconstitutional and consequently set aside the same 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 proceedings in Rc. No. 94/2025/C., dt. 16-12-2025 passed by the 3rd respondent u/s. 6 of the Land Encroachment Act, whereunder directed the petitioners to remove the houses alleged to have situated in Sy. No. 70/1, which was classified as a Gedda Poramboke land of E. Marripalem village, Parawada mandal, Anakapalli District, pending disposal of the writ petition and pass Counsel for the Petitioner(S): 1. KOTI REDDY IDAMAKANTI Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. GP FOR REVENUE The Court made the following ORDER: This Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking the following relief: “to issue a writ or order more particularly one in the nature writ of mandamus or an appropriate writ or order declaring the proceedings in Rc No 94/2025/C dt 16122025 passed by the 3rd respondent u/s 6 of the Land Encroachment Act whereunder directed the petitioners to remove the houses alleged to have situated in Sy No 70/1 which was classified as a Gedda Poramboke land of E Marripalem village Parawada mandal Anakapalli District is illegal arbitrary and unconstitutional and consequently set aside the same and pass…” 2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned Government Pleader for Revenue appearing for the respondents. 3. The learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the 3rd respondent herein has passed an order vide Rc.No.94/2025/C/dated 16- 12-2025, directing the petitioners to remove their respective dwelling houses with door numbers in Survey No.70-1 of Marripalem Village, Paravada Mandal, Anakapalli District. The order further directs that, in the event of failure, the respondents shall demolish the petitioners’ dwelling houses and forfeit the same. He submits that the said order was passed without considering the oral and written explanations dated 20-08-2025, along with the valid documents submitted by the petitioners in response to the notice issued vide Rc.No.94/2025 dated 23-07-2025, under Section 7 of the Andhra Pradesh Land Encroachment Act, 1905. 4. Considering the aforesaid submission, this Court is of the considered view that the writ petition can be disposed of by granting liberty to the petitioner to prefer an appeal under Section 10(1)(a) of the Andhra Pradesh Land Encroachment Act, 1905, within the prescribed period of limitation, along with an interlocutory application, if so advised. In the event of such appeal and interlocutory application being filed, the respondent appellate authority shall consider the interlocutory application and pass appropriate orders in accordance with law. Till such time, the respondents are directed not to dispossess the petitioners from their subject property, except in accordance with due process of law. 5. With the above direction, the writ petition is disposed of. No costs. Consequently, Miscellaneous Petitions, if any, pending in the writ petition shall stand closed. ________________________ JUSTICE D. RAMESH 05.01.2026 RMD THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE D RAMESH WRIT PETITION No.18 of 2026 05.01.2026 RMD