Smt.Kuppili Anasuya, vs The State Of Andhra Pradesh,
2022 Latest Caselaw 6655 AP

                                           1




         HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI


Main Case No.W.P.No.29040 of 2022

                             PROCEEDING SHEET

 Sl.
                                                ORDER

 No      DATE

1.     9.09.2022   DR, J

The Writ Petition is filed questioning

the notice of District Collector,

Visakhapatnam District in

Rc.No.266/2020/A dated 29.08.2022 under

Section 6 of AP Land Encroachment

At,1905.

The contention of the learned counsel

for the petitioner is that the petitioner is the

bonafide purchaser, constructed house in

the subject property and residing therein.

To support his contention, the learned

counsel for the petitioner has placed the

house tax receipts and electricity bills along

with the Writ Petition. He further contended

that now the respondents with an intention

to evict the petitioner have initiated

proceedings under Land Encroachment

Act,1905 (for short 'the Act') and issued

notice under Section 7 of the Act to the

petitioner. On perusal of the impugned

notice issued under Section 6 of the Act, it

is clear that no reasons are mentioned in

the impugned notice except directing the

petitioner to evict the subject land. The

learned counsel for the petitioner further

submitted that as per the ratio decided by

this Court in Government of Andhra

Pradesh Vs. Thummala Krishna Rao and

another, it is categorically held that

summarily proceedings can be initiated

only on the unauthorized occupation of the

property which is not in dispute. But, when

the title of the property is in dispute, such

dispute must be adjudicated not by

summarily proceedings but by the civil

Court.

     Learned             Government          Pleader

appearing        for     the     respondents       has

submitted that the impugned order is

passed under Section 6 of the Act and

against the said orders, the petitioner have

separate remedy under Section 10 of the

Act. But, without availing the statutory

remedy, the petitioner have approached this

Court by filing the present Writ Petition

which is not maintainable.

Considering the submissions of thee

learned counsel for the petitioner and in

view of the observations made by the Apex

Court in the above judgment, there shall be

an interim suspension of the impugned

order and notice of the Tahsildar, Pendurthi

Mandal, Visakhapatnam District in

Rc.No.266/2020/A dated 29.08.2022 under

Section 6 of the Act, pending further orders.

For filing counter, post after four(4)

weeks.

_______ DR, J tm