Kandru Venkateswarlu vs State Of Andhra Pradesh,
2021 Latest Caselaw 614 AP

Citation : 2021 Latest Caselaw 614 AP
Judgement Date : 4 February, 2021

Andhra Pradesh High Court - Amravati

Kandru Venkateswarlu vs State Of Andhra Pradesh, on 4 February, 2021

Bench: Ninala Jayasurya

        THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE NINALA JAYASURYA

                WRIT PETITION No.2588 OF 2021

ORDER:

Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and learned

Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue appearing for the

respondents. With their consent, the Writ Petition is being

disposed off.

2. The Writ Petition is filed seeking to declare the notices

under Section 7 & 6 of A.P. Land Encroachment Act, 1905 (for

short "the Act"), dated 06.01.2021 issued by the 3rd respondent

as illegal, arbitrary, contrary to the procedure established by law

etc.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioners interalia contended that

the respondent No.3 had simultaneously issued notices under

Section 7 & 6 of the Act, dated 06.01.2021 and the same is not

sustainable in law. Learned counsel submits that no opportunity

whatsoever was afforded to the petitioners for submitting the

explanation pursuant to the notices issued under Section 7 of the

said Act which is also not tenable. Learned counsel further

submits that infact the petitioners are in possession and

enjoyment of the property in question for more than 30 years and

under the said circumstances invocation of the provisions under

the said Act is contrary to law in view of the judgment of the

Hon'ble Supreme Court reported in 1982 (2) SCC 134. Apart from

the same, learned counsel also submits that the issuance of

notice under Section 6 of the Act without assigning any detailed

reasons is contrary to the judgment of this erst while High Court

reported Kadiyala Sudershan and others Vs. Government of

Andhra Pradesh1. The relevant portion of the judgment reads as

follows:

"notice of eviction under Section 6 of the Act is akin to a decree, needs to be supported by a reasoned order comparable to a judgment. Otherwise, Section 7 of the Act providing for issuance of a show cause notice would be rendered nugatory or reduced to an empty formality."

4. Learned Assistant Government Pleader submits that there

is no violation of law as only notices were issued to the petitioners

and in the event, this Court is of the opinion that proper notices

have not been issued to the petitioners, appropriate orders may

be passed.

5. Considering the submissions made by the learned counsel

for the petitioners and perusing the impugned notices, this Court

is of the considered view that the authorities i.e., 3rd respondent

has not followed the statutory provisions of the 'Act' in true letter

and spirit and they issued the impugned notices simultaneously.

Further, as contended by the learned counsel for the petitioners

no opportunity is afforded before initiating the action under the