APHC010385882026 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3311] Friday, the 24th day of July, 2026 Present The Honourable Ms. Justice B. S. Bhanumathi Writ Petition No: 20653 of 2026 Between: M/s. BSCPL Infrastructure Limited ...Petitioner and The State of Andhra Pradesh and others ...Respondents Counsel for the petitioner: 1. K. Narsi Reddy Counsel for the respondents: 1. G.P. for Revenue The Court made the following: 2 BSB,J W.P.No.20653 of 2026 ORDER: The writ petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, seeking the following relief: “…to issue a writ, order or direction, especially one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus, aggrieved by the action of the respondent No.4 in issuing notice vide Rc.No.B / 332 / 2026, dated 20.07.2026 directing to remove the building and iron fencing laid by the petitioner for an extent of Ac. 3.41 cents in Sy. No. 26 of Mannela Village, Anantapur Rural Mandal, Anantapur District, within 3 days, without issuing show cause notice, without providing opportunity to submit explanation to the petitioner and without following due process of law is illegal, arbitrary, against the principles of natural justice and violation of Articles 14, 19(g) and 21 of the Constitution of India and set-aside the same and consequently direct the respondent No. 4 not to remove the building and iron fencing in the above said land…” 2. The case of the petitioner, briefly stated, is as follows: a. The petitioner is a quarry lease holder in respect of 13.665 hectares in Sy. No. 28/P of Mannela Village, Anantapuramu Rural Mandal, Anantapur District for a period of 15 years. The said lease was granted vide proceeding dated 30.07.2025 of District Mines and Geology Officer, Anantapuramu. The petitioner filed an application on 14.01.2026 for usage of Ac. 3.41 cents in Sy. No. 26 adjacent to the petitioner‟s leased property. After enquiry, the respondent No. 4 addressed a letter to the Assistant Director, Mines & Geology, Anantapuramu vide Rc.No.B / 223 / 2026, dated 26.04.2026 stating that the said land is available for grant of lease for a period of 30 years to the applicant. The application of the petitioner is pending before the Director, Mines & Geology, Mangalagiri. 3 BSB,J W.P.No.20653 of 2026 b. While things stood thus, basing on the complaint made by Panju Harinath and others of Mannela Village through P.G.R.S., the respondent No. 4 issued impugned notice vide Rc.No.B / 332 / 2026, dated 20.07.2026 directing the petitioner to remove the office building and iron fencing laid around the land in Sy. No. 26 of Mannela Village within three days, without following due procedure. Hence, this writ petition was filed. 3. The impugned notice dated 20.07.2026, reads as follows: “Rc.No.B/332/2026 O/o the Tahsildar, Ananthapuramu Rural, Dt: 20.07.2026. Notice Sub:-PGRS Petition - Ananthapuramu District – Ananthapuramu Division Ananthapuramu Mandal -Sri Panju Harinath & others have requested to take necessary action against the BSCPL Company for encroachment of Government land in Sy.No.26 of Mannela Village - Notice Issued - Regarding. Ref:- Representation of Sri Panju Harinath & others of Mannela Village through PGRS No.ATP202607203599, Dt:20.07.2026. ****** It is to inform that, Sri Panju Harinath & others have filed a representation through PGRS No.ATP202607203599, Dt: 20.07.2026 stating that, the Management of BSCPL Company has doing mining work in Sy.No.28 of Mannila Village and the wastage has been dumped in the Sy.No.26, which causes to rainy water was not stored in the check-dam. The rainy water also diverted into the adjacent agriculture fields, which damages the crops and it leads to shortage of water in the bore wells. Further, they have stated that, the revenue officials have 4 BSB,J W.P.No.20653 of 2026 submitted the feasibility report to the District Mines & Geology Director for mining in Sy.No.26 Ext Ac 3.41 cts of Mannela Village in favour of BSCPL Company without obtaining adjacent pattadars statement. Finally they have requested to remove the iron fencing lald by the company around the land in Sy. No.26 of Mannela Village without obtaining permission / license. Further it is informed that, I have inspected the subject land along with Village Revenue Officer and Village Surveyor of Mannela Village, it is noticed that, the M/s BSCPL Infrastructure Ltd has constructed one office building (with in extent of 0.03 cts) and laid temporary iron fencing wall in the land in Sy.No.26 Extent 3.41 Acs of Mannela Village without obtaining permission or lease from the concerned authorities. In this connection, it is directed to the Management of BSCPL Company for removal of office building and iron fencing laid around the land in Sy.No.26 of Mannela Village within 3 days. If you not remove the iron fencing, necessary action will be taken as per rules. Tahsildar, Ananthapuramu Rural mandal.” 4. The learned counsel for the petitioner mainly contended that the notice is unsustainable for not reflecting the provision of law under which it was issued, for not giving adequate time and also for not following procedure contemplated under law for removal of the encroachment, if any. He further submitted that the proposed notice is illegal as it was not preceded by a notice under Section 7 of the Andhra Pradesh Land Encroachment Act, 1905 (in short „the Act, 1905‟) or the final order under Section 6 of the Act, 1905. 5. Sri G. Divyatheja, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue, requested to treat the impugned notice as notice under 5 BSB,J W.P.No.20653 of 2026 Section 7 of the Act, 1905 and give the petitioner an opportunity to file reply / objections or, in case this Court treats the impugned notice as not sustainable, an appropriate order may be passed, giving liberty to the respondents to serve the petitioner notice afresh as per law. 6. Keeping in view the defects in the notice pointed out by the learned counsel for the petitioner, the same needs to be set aside as it is not in proper form for not following procedure prescribed under law. However, the respondents can proceed as per law in case the subject structure was not made without seeking any permission. 7. Accordingly, the writ petition is allowed and the impugned notice vide Rc.No.B / 332 / 2026, dated 20.07.26 is set aside, however, giving liberty to the respondents to issue the petitioner notice afresh by following due process of law. Pending miscellaneous applications, if any, shall stand closed. ________________________ JUSTICE B.S. BHANUMATHI Dated: 24.07.2026 Note: Issue C.C. by 27.07.2026 b/o NSM 6 BSB,J W.P.No.20653 of 2026 45 The Honourable Ms. Justice B.S.Bhanumathi Writ Petition No: 20653 of 2026 Dated: 24.07.2026 Note: Issue C.C. by 27.07.2026 b/o NSM