Research › Search › Judgment

Andhra High Court · body

2021 DIGILAW 370 (AP)

Vasuplalli Nagaraju v. State Of Andhra Pradesh

2021-06-30

M.SATYANARAYANA MURTHY

body2021
ORDER: 1. This writ petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, seeking the following relief: “To issue Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the 3rd respondent vide proceedings in notice dated 24.05.2021 under Section 7 of Andhra Pradesh Land Encroachment Act, 1905, in initiating steps for dispossessing the petitioner from his residential Plot No. 25 consisting of RCC slabbed house in an extent of Ac. 0.03 cents in Sy.No. 314 P with Assessment No.1233- A at Kapuluppada, Bheemunipatnam Mandal, Visakhapatnam District and for removal of the structures etc therein as illegal, arbitrary and without jurisdiction and violative of principles of natural justice, violative of Article 14 of Constitution of India, ultravires his powers under the provisions of Andhra Pradesh Land Encroachment Act 1905.” 2. The facts of the case in brief are that, the petitioner is the owner and possessor of the Plot No. 25 consisting of RCC building in an extent of Ac. 0.03 cents in Sy.No. 314 P with Assessment No.1233-A at Kapuluppada, Bheemunipatnam Mandal, Visakhapatnam District, having been assigned by the 3rd respondent on 12.05.1985, considering the case of the petitioner as landless poor person. The petitioner constructed a residential house therein and he has been in possession and enjoyment of the same and his enjoyment is duly recorded in the Panchayat records. The Electricity authorities are provided power supply to the residential house of the petitioner and the property is assessed by the GVMS Authorities. While the matter stood thus, the 3rd respondent/Tahsildar, Bheemunipatnam Mandal, Visakhapatnam District issued notice dated 24.05.2021, directed the petitioner to vacate the house without following due process of law. The action of the 3rd respondent is illegal and arbitrary and requested to issue a direction as stated supra. 3. No counter affidavit is filed by the respondents. 4. During hearing, Sri G.V.S. Kishore Kumar, learned counsel for the petitioner reiterated the contentions urged in the affidavit, whereas, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue submitted that the 3rd respondent/Tahsildar, Bheemunipatnam issued Notice dated 24.05.2021 to the petitioner under Section 7 of Act No.3 of Andhra Pradesh Act, 1905, calling upon this petitioner to submit his explanation to the show cause to notice, so as to enable the 3rd respondent to pass appropriate orders. But, no explanation is submitted as on date. 5. But, no explanation is submitted as on date. 5. However, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue agreed to get the land surveyed and on conducting survey, if the petitioner is found in possession of land in excess of the land covered by assignment ‘D’ Form Patta referred above, based on the notice of the 3rd respondent dated 24.05.2021, appropriate action would be taken. 6. The petitioner admittedly received Notice dated 24.05.2021 under Section 7 of Act No.3 of Andhra Pradesh Act, 1905, issued by the 3rd respondent/Tahsildar, Bheemunipatname. But, no explanation is submitted by the petitioner to the notice dated 24.05.2021. If, the petitioner submits his explanation to the notice, the third respondent can pass appropriate order(s). But, no such explanation is offered by the petitioner till date. Therefore, the petitioner is directed to submit his explanation to the Notice dated 24.05.2021 within fifteen days from today. On receipt of explanation from the petitioner, the 3rd respondent/Tahsildar, Bheemunipatnam is directed to afford an opportunity to the petitioner of personal hearing and if there is any dispute regarding the encroachment, the 3rd respondent/Tahsildar is directed to get the land surveyed and pass appropriate order(s), in accordance with law, within four weeks from the date of receipt of copy of the order(s) and on passing any order, the petitioner if aggrieved, may take recourse under Section 10 of Act No.3 of Andhra Pradesh Act, 1905. 7. Learned counsel for the petitioner also contended that, Act No.3 of Andhra Pradesh (Madras) Act, 1905, has no application to the land in dispute. But, such plea can be raised by the petitioner in the explanation and on raising the same, the 3rd respondent/Tahsildar is directed to decide whether the provisions of Land Encroachment Act are applicable or not. However, till passing such final order under Section 6 of Act No.3 of Andhra Pradesh Act, 1905, the respondents shall not disturb the possession of the petitioner. 8. With the above direction, writ petition is disposed of. No costs. 9. Consequently, miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shall also stand closed.