APHC010361292026 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3311] Thursday, the 23rd day of July, 2026 Present The Honourable Ms. Justice B. S. Bhanumathi Writ Petition No: 19184 of 2026 Between: Srigiri Ramesh ...Petitioner and The State of Andhra Pradesh and others ...Respondents Counsel for the petitioner: 1. Thandava Yogesh Counsel for the respondents: 1. G.P. for Revenue The Court made the following: 2 BSB,J W.P.No.19184 of 2026 ORDER: The writ petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, seeking the following relief: “…to issue an appropriate writ, order or direction, more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus, declaring the action of the respondents, particularly the respondent No. 4, in issuing the impugned notice vide R.C.A / 118 / 2026, dated 11.07.2026, received by the petitioner on 13.07.2026 at about 3.30 P.M., proposing to evict the petitioner from the schedule property and in taking coercive steps to dispossess the petitioner by seeking police assistance, despite the pendency of O.S. No. 367 of 2026 on the file of the Court of the Principal Civil Judge (Junior Division), Giddalur, as illegal, arbitrary, without jurisdiction, violative of the principles of natural justice and Articles 14, 21 and 300-A of the Constitution of India, and consequently set aside the impugned notice dated 11.07.2026, restrain the respondents from interfering with the petitioner's peaceful possession and enjoyment of the schedule property except by following due process of law, and pass…” 2. The case of the petitioner, stated briefly, is as follows: a. The petitioner is the absolute owner and possessor of land to an extent of 205.55 square yards in Sy. No. 540-2 situated in Anumulapalle Grama panchayat, Racherla mandal, Markapuram district. The petitioner planted teak trees fifteen years ago in the subject land. While things stood thus, third parties are trying to evict the petitioner with the help of political affiliation. The respondent No. 4 issued an eviction notice to the petitioner on 01.06.2026. In response thereto, the petitioner, along with some villagers, submitted a representation to the 3 BSB,J W.P.No.19184 of 2026 respondent No. 2. The respondent No. 2 issued a proceeding dated 27.06.2026 that the disputes relating to a said survey number were pending before a civil Court. b. On 11.07.2026, the respondent No. 4 issued an eviction notice vide R.C.A / 118 / 2026, directing the petitioner to vacate the subject land within three days from the date of receipt of the notice. The notice was served on the petitioner on 13.07.2026. Despite the pendency of suit in O.S. No. 367 of 2026, the impugned notice was issued without following due process. Hence, this writ petition was filed. 3. Sri G. Divyatheja, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue, placed on record a copy of written instructions of the respondent No. 4 vide Rc.B./118/2026, dated 15.07.2026, wherein it is stated that the impugned notice was issued after an enquiry made by affording opportunity to all the parties and that the subject land was classified as „Tope Poramboke land‟ as per R.S.R. Hence, the subject land is a government land. It is prayed to dismiss the writ petition. He further submitted that since the petitioner has right of appeal under Section 10 of the Andhra Pradesh Land Encroachment Act, 1905, the petitioner can avail the remedy by appeal before the appropriate forum. 4. Section 10 of the Andhra Pradesh Land Encroachment Act, 1905, reads as below: “Appeal:- (1) An appeal shall lie (a) to the Collector from any decision or order passed by a Tahsildar or Deputy Tahsildar under this Act, and (b) to the District Collector from any decision or order of a Collector passed otherwise than on appeal, and (c) to the Board of Revenue from any decision or order of a District Collector passed otherwise than on appeal. There shall be no appeal against a 4 BSB,J W.P.No.19184 of 2026 decision or order passed by the Collector or the District Collector on appeal, but the District Collector may revise any decision or order passed by a Deputy Tahsildar or Collector under this Act, and the Board of Revenue may revise any decision or order passed by any officer under this Act. (2) Pending the disposal of any appeal or petition for revision under this Act, the District Collector or the Board of Revenue as the case may be, may suspend the execution of the order appealed against or sought to be revised.” 5. In reply, the learned counsel for the petitioner requested to pass an appropriate order giving liberty to the petitioner to file an appeal. 6. As such, the writ petition is disposed of giving liberty to the petitioner to prefer an appeal against the impugned notice before appropriate forum. Till the expiry of the period of appeal, the impugned notice dated 11.07.2026 is suspended from operation. Pending miscellaneous applications, if any, shall stand closed. ________________________ JUSTICE B.S. BHANUMATHI Dated: 23.07.2026 NSM 5 BSB,J W.P.No.19184 of 2026 42 The Honourable Ms. Justice B.S.Bhanumathi Writ Petition No: 19184 of 2026 Dated: 23.07.2026 NSM