Vakada Chinna, vs The State Of Andhra Pradesh
2022 Latest Caselaw 7068 AP

                                1




       HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI


Main Case No.W.P.No.29714 of 2022

                         PROCEEDING SHEET

Sl.
                                     ORDER

No       DATE
1.                 DR, J
      15.09.2022                I.A.No.1 of 2022

This Writ Petition is filed questioning the notice of the Tahsildar, Pendurti Mandal, Visakhapatnam District in Rc.No.266/2020/A dated 29.08.2022 under Section 6 of AP Land Encroachment Act,1905.

The contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner is that the petitioner in this Writ Petition is bonafide purchaser, he has constructed house in the subject property and residing therein.

To support his contention he has placed the Xerox copies of sale agreement cum possession agreement and electricity bill 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 6 of the Act to the petitioner.

On perusal of the impugned notice, it is clear that no reasons are mentioned in the impugned notice, except directing the petitioner to evict the subject house.

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 occupation of the property which is not in dispute. But, when the title of the property is in dispute, such dispute must be adjudicated only by summarily proceedings but not by the civil Court.

Learned Government Pleader appearing for the respondents has submitted that the impugned orders are passed under Section 6 of the Act and against the said orders, the petitioner has separate remedy under Section 10 of the Act. But, without availing the statutory remedy, the petitioner has approached

this Court by filing the present Writ Petition which is not maintainable.

Considering the submissions of the 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 sj