APHC010434102026 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3331] MONDAY, THE 17th DAY OF AUGUST 2026 PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE SUBBA REDDY SATTI WRIT PETITION NO: 23539/2026 Between: 1. SURLA DEMUDU, S/O (LATE) SURLA KANNAIAH, AGED ABOUT 56 YEARS, OCC FARMER, R/O H.NO.17-2-173, TURPUGOLU BC COLONY, GANDHINAGARAM, BALIGHATTAM VILLAGE, NARSIPATNAM MANDAL, ANAKAPALLI DISTRICT - 531116. 2. SURLA APPALANAIDU, S/O SURLA DEMUDU, AGED 34 YEARS, OCC FARMER, R/O H.NO.17-2-173, TURPUGOLU BC COLONY, GANDHINAGARAM, BALIGHATTAM VILLAGE, NARSIPATNAM MANDAL, ANAKAPALLI DISTRICT - 531116 ...PETITIONER(S) AND 1. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, REVENUE DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT, VELAGAPUDI, AMARAVATI, ANDHRA PRADESH.522237 2. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, ANAKAPALLI DISTRICT, ANAKAPALLI, ANDHRA PRADESH. 531002 3. THE REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER, NARSIPATNAM, ANAKAPALLI DISTRICT, ANDHRA PRADESH. 531116 4. THE TAHSILDAR, NARSIPATNAM MANDAL, ANAKAPALLI DISTRICT, ANDHRA PRADESH. 531116 ...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 issue an appropriate Writ, Order or Direction, more particularly a Writ of Mandamus, declaring the action of the 4th Respondent/Tahsildar, Narsipatnam, in issuing the impugned notice bearing Rc.No.265/2026/J.A., dated 11.08.2026, purportedly under Section 7 of the Andhra Pradesh Land Encroachment Act, 1905, directing the Petitioners to vacate the alleged Government land within seven days and threatening them with summary eviction and forfeiture, in respect of the Petitioners' property situated in an extent of 201.46 Sq. Yards in Survey No.381-1, 6th Ward, 6th Block, East George Street, near Gandhi Bomma, bearing D.No.6-6-80, together with the residential building therein bearing D.No.17-2-173 and Assessment No.1136005868, situated at Balighattam Village, Narsipatnam Mandal, Anakapalli District, as being illegal, arbitrary, without jurisdiction, contrary to the mandatory requirements of Section 7 of the Andhra Pradesh Land Encroachment Act, 1905, violative of the principles of natural justice and Articles 14 and 300-A of the Constitution of India, and consequently set aside the said impugned notice and direct the Respondents not to dispossess the Petitioners from, or interfere with their peaceful possession and enjoyment of, the aforesaid subject property pursuant to or in furtherance of the impugned notice, except by following due process of law, 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 suspend the operation and all further proceedings pursuant to the impugned notice bearing Rc.No.265/2026/J.A., dated 11.08.2026, issued by the 4th Respondent/Tahsildar, Narsipatnam, purportedly under Section 7 of the Andhra Pradesh Land Encroachment Act, 1905, and consequently restrain the Respondents, their subordinates, agents or anybody claiming through or under them from dispossessing the Petitioners from, interfering with their peaceful possession and enjoyment of, or demolishing or otherwise interfering with the residential building situated in an extent of 201.46 Sq. Yards in Survey No.381-1, 6th Ward, 6th Block, East George Street, near Gandhi Bomma, bearing D.No.6-6-80, together with the residential building therein bearing D.No.17-2-173 and Assessment No.1136005868, Balighattam Village, Narsipatnam Mandal, Anakapalli District, or from taking any coercive steps pursuant to the impugned notice, pending disposal of the Writ Petition, Counsel for the Petitioner(S): 1. P NANILU NAIDU Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. GP FOR REVENUE The Court made the following: ORDER This writ petition is moved by way of a lunch motion. 2. Heard Sri P.Nanilu Naidu, learned counsel for the petitioners and Sri Divya Teja, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue for the respondents. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioners would submit that notice under Section 7 of the A.P. Land Encroachment Act, 1905 (for short “the Act”) vide Rc.No.265/2026/JA, dated 11.08.2026 (Ex.P1), was issued by 4th respondent- Tahsildar pointing out that the petitioners encroached upon 119.10 square yards in S.No.379 of Balighattam village, Narsipatnam Mandal, Anakapalli District. He would also submit that as per Ex.P1 notice, the 4th respondent directed the petitioners to vacate the building within 7 days and the petitioners were not given any opportunity to submit the explanation. He would submit that Ex.P1 notice does not align with the proforma prescribed under the Act. 4. Sri Divya Teja, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue for the respondents would submit that the impugned Ex.P1 notice may be treated as a notice under Section 7 of the Act. If the petitioners submit an explanation by annexing all relevant documents, the 4th respondent will conduct an enquiry and will pass appropriate orders as per law, after affording an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner. 5. Given the facts and circumstances of the case, keeping the writ petition pending and inviting a counter will not serve any purpose. 6. Accordingly, the Writ Petition is disposed of at the admission stage with the consent of learned counsel on either side with the following directions: (i) The notice vide Rc.No.265/2026/JA, dated 11.08.2026 (Ex.P1) shall be treated as notice under Section 7 of the Act. (ii) The petitioners shall submit an explanation to the 4th respondent, within a period of fifteen (15) days from today, by annexing all relevant documents. (iii) Upon receipt of such explanation, the 4th respondent shall conduct an enquiry, afford an opportunity of hearing to the petitioners and pass a reasoned order as per law, within a period of four weeks from thereafter. (iv) Till such exercise is completed, the 4th respondent shall not interfere with the H.No.17-2-173, Turpugolu BC Colony, Gandhinagaram, Balighattam village, Narsipatnam Mandal, Anakapalli District. (v) No order as to costs. As a sequel, all the pending miscellaneous applications shall stand closed. ___________________________ JUSTICE SUBBA REDDY SATTI PVD