IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) FRIDAY, THE TWENTY NINETH DAY OF FEBRUARY TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE V.ESWARAIAH W.P.Nos.3961, 3962, 3963, 3964, 3993, 3996 & 3998 of 2008 WRIT PETITION NO : 3961 of 2008 Between: 1 T. Veeranna, S/o. Dharma Raju, R/o. Burrilanka, Kadiyam Mandal, E.G. District. 2 Nagireddy Gangadhar Rao S/o. Doraiah R/o. Burrilanka, Kadiyam Mandal, E.G. District. ..... PETITIONERS AND 1 The District Collector, East Godavari District at Kakinada. 2 The Tahsildar, Kadiyam Mandal, E.G. District. .....RESPONDENT(S) Petition under Article 226 of the constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the Affidavit filed herein the High Court will be pleased to to issue a writ order or direction more particularly one in the nature of writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the respondents in initiating proceedings under the provisions of A.P. Land Encroachment Act for the purpose of taking possession of petitioner's lands an extent of Ac Ac 0-20cents in Sy.No. 210/1 of Kadiyam Village, Kadiyam Mandal, E.G. District as illegal, arbitrary null and void and for a consequential direction to the respondents to stop proceedings under the provisions of the A.P. Land Encroachment Act 1905 and to pass Counsel for the Petitioners:MR.M.V.SURESH Counsel for the Respondents: GP FOR REVENUE WRIT PETITION NO : 3962 of 2008 Between: 1 Nagireddy Veerraju, S/o. Doraiah R/o. Burrilanka, Kadiyam Mandal, E.G. District. 2 Nagireddy Gangadhar Rao S/o. Doraiah R/o. Burrilanka, Kadiyam Mandal, E.G. District. ..... PETITIONER(S) AND 1 The District Collector, East Godavari District at Kakinada. 2 The Tahsildar, Kadiyam Mandal, E.G. District. .....RESPONDENT(S) Petition under Article 226 of the constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the Affidavit filed herein the High Court will be pleased to to issue a writ order or direction more particularly one in the nature of writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the respondents in initiating proceedings under the provisions of A.P. Land Encroachment Act for the purpose of taking possession of petitioner's lands an extent of Ac 0-48 3/4, and Ac 0-48 3/4 cents in Sy.No. 210/1 of Kadiyam Village, Kadiyam Mandal, E.G. District as illegal, arbitrary null and void and for a consequential direction to the respondents to stop proceedings under the provisions of the A.P. Land Encroachment Act 1905 and to pass Counsel for the Petitioners:MR.M.V.SURESH Counsel for the Respondents: GP FOR REVENUE WRIT PETITION NO : 3963 of 2008 Between: Tadala Gangaraju, s/o. Krishnamma, R/o. Kadiyapulanka, Kadiyam Mandal, East Godavari District. ..... PETITIONER AND 1 The District Collector, Kadyam Mandal, East Godavari District. 2 The Tahsildar, Kadyam Mandal, East Godavari District. .....RESPONDENT(S) Petition under Article 226 of the constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the Affidavit filed herein the High Court will be pleased to to issue a writ order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the respondents in initiating proceedings under the provisions of AP land Encroachment Act for the purpose of taking possession of petitioner's lands an extent of Ac. 0-97 1/2 cents in Sy.No. 210/1 of Kadiyam Village, Kadiyam Mandal, East Godavari District as illegal, arbitrary, null and void and for a consequential direction to the respondents to stop proceedings under the provisions of the A.P. Land Encroachment Act 1995 and to pass Counsel for the Petitioner:MR.M.V.SURESH Counsel for the Respondents: GP FOR REVENUE WRIT PETITION NO : 3964 of 2008 Between: T. Kondaiah, S/o. Satyam, R/o. Burrilanka, Kadiyam Mandal, East Godavari District. ..... PETITIONER AND 1 The District Collector, East Godavari District at Kakinada. 2 The Tahsildar, Kadiyam Mandal, E.G. District. .....RESPONDENT(S) Petition under Article 226 of the constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the Affidavit filed herein the High Court will be pleased to to issue a writ order or direction more particularly one in the nature of writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the respondents in initiating proceedings under the provisions of A.P.Land Encroachment Act for the purpose of taking possession of petitioners's lands an extent of Ac.0-97 1/2 in Sy.No.210/1 of Kadiyam Village, Kadiyam Mandal, E.G. Disrict as illegal, arbitrary, null and void and for a consequential direction to the respondents to stop proceedings under the provisions of the A.P. Land Encroachment Act 1905 and to pass such other order or orders Counsel for the Petitioner:MR.M.V.SURESH Counsel for the Respondents: GP FOR REVENUE WRIT PETITION NO : 3993 of 2008 Between: 1 R. Venkatarama Rao, S/o. Musalaiah @ Mahalakshmi, R/o. Burrilanka, Kadiyam Mandal, E.G. District. 2 Padala Subbalakshmi, W/o. Venkata Subbaiah, R/o. Gadala Village, Korukonda Mandal, E.G. District. ..... PETITIONER(S) AND 1 The District Collector, East Godavari District at Kakinada. 2 The Tahsildar, Kadiyam Mandal, E.G. District. .....RESPONDENT(S) Petition under Article 226 of the constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the Affidavit filed herein the High Court will be pleased to to issue a writ order or direction more particularly one in the nature of writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the respondents in initiating proceedings under the provisions of A.P. Land Encroachment Act for the purpose of taking possession of petitioner's lands an extent of Ac 0-171/2cents and Ac. 0-45 cents in in Sy.No. 210/1 of Kadiyam Village, Kadiyam Mandal, E.G. District as illegal, arbitrary null and void and for a consequential direction to the respondents to stop proceedings under the provisions of the A.P. Land Encroachment Act 1905 and to pass Counsel for the Petitioners:MR.M.V.SURESH Counsel for the Respondents: GP FOR REVENUE WRIT PETITION NO : 3996 of 2008 Between: Ratnam Veeraju S/o. Venkateswara Rao, Minor, Rep. by his Mother and Guardian R. Kanakadurga Vishnu Chakravarthi W/o. Venkateswara Rao aged 45 yrs, R/o. Kadiyapu Lanka, Kidiyam Mandal, E.G. District. ..... PETITIONER AND 1 The District Collector, E.G. District at Kakinada. 2 The Tahsildar, Kadiyam Mandal, E.G. District. .....RESPONDENT(S) Petition under Article 226 of the constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the Affidavit filed herein the High Court will be pleased to to issue a writ order or direction more particularly one in the nature of writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the respondents in initiating proceedings under the Provisions of A.P. Land Encroachment Act for the purpose of taking possession of petitioner's lands an extent of Ac 0-971/2 cents in Sy.No. 210/1 of Kadiyam Village, Kadiyam Mandal, E.G.District as illegal, arbitrary null and void and for a consequential direction to the respondents to stop proceedings under the provisions of the A.P. Land Encroachment Act 1905 and to pass Counsel for the Petitioner:MR.M.V.SURESH Counsel for the Respondents: GP FOR REVENUE WRIT PETITION NO : 3998 of 2008 Between: 1 P. Satyanarayana S/o Satyanarayana R/o Kaiapusavaram, Kadiyam mandal, East Godavari District. 2 B. Sudha Devi, W/o Nageswra Rao r/o Kadiyam, East Godavari District. ..... PETITIONER(S) AND 1 The District Collector, East Godavari district at kakinada. 2 The Tahsildar, kadiyam Mandal, East Godavari District. .....RESPONDENT(S) Petition under Article 226 of the constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the Affidavit filed herein the High Court will be pleased to issue a writ order or direction more particularly one in the nture of writ of mandamus declaring the action of the respondents in initiating proceedings under the provisions of A.P. Land Encroachment Act for the purpose of taking possessionof petitioner's lands an extent of Ac. 0-48 3/4 and Ac. 0- 283/4 cents in Sy. No. 210/1 of Kadiyam Village, Kadiyam mandal, East Godavari District as illegal, arbitrary, null and void and for a consequential direction to the respondents to stop proceedings underthe provisions of the A.P. Land Encroachment Act 1905 and to pass such other order or orders. Counsel for the Petitioners:MR.M.V.SURESH Counsel for the Respondents: GP FOR REVENUE The Court made the following : COMMON ORDER: In all the seven writ petitions, except the petitioners, the respondents are one and the same and the issues involved including the date of notices, explanations and final orders are similar and as such I deem it proper to dispose of the same by way of this common order. It is the case of the petitioners that they have purchased different extents of lands in Sy.No.210/1 of Kadiyam village, Kadiyam Mandal, East Godavari District. It is stated that the petitioners and their predeceased-in-title are in continuous and uninterrupted possession of the lands from over a period of 40 years. While so, the Mandal Revenue Officer, Kadiyam issued show cause notice dated 25.01.2008 under Section 7 of the A.P. Land Encroachment Act, 3 of 1905 (for short “the Act”) calling upon the petitioners as to why they shall not be summarily dispossessed from the encroached land in Sy.No.210/1 which is a government land (GD Gayaru). It is stated that the petitioners have received the said show cause notices on 28/29.01.2008 and submitted individual explanations on 5/6.02.2008 stating that they are in long standing possession and the said land is a patta land but not the government land. After receiving the explanations, the Mandal Revenue Officer passed individual orders dated 09.02.2008 under Section 6 of the Act directing the petitioners to vacate the land within 14 days from the date of receipt of the notices. The second respondent issued cyclostyled notices filling up all the blanks and after filing the explanations, again cyclostyled orders have been passed filling up of blanks of the extent said to have been encroached by the petitioners. A perusal of the impugned orders passed under Section 6 of the Act goes to show that the explanations have not been considered. That being so, I am of the opinion that the impugned orders have been passed by giving reasonable opportunity. Issuance of show cause notices and submission of explanations have become moody formality. Therefore, I am of the opinion that the orders passed under Section 6 of the Act are appelable under Section 10 of the Act before the Revenue Divisional Officer. As the explanations have not been submitted and none of the contentions of the petitioners dealt with, I am of the opinion that the impugned orders are liable to be set aside. Having regard to the facts of the case, the impugned orders are set aside directing the second respondent to conduct enquiry and give a reasonable opportunity with reference to the explanations submitted by the petitioners and pass appropriate orders in accordance with law. With the aforesaid directions, all the writ petitions are disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs. _____________ V.ESWARAIAH,J Date:29.02.2008 ccm To 1.2CCs to 2.2CD copies Form-NIC-OGS/WP{SPJS}