THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE B.SESHASAYANA REDDY Writ Petition No.18277 of 2007 (Dated : 26-07-2010) Between: D.Narsing Rao S/o D.Nagabhshanam Gousepura, Darusalam, Hyderabad. …Petitioner A n d The Government of Andhra Pradesh, rep. By its Principal Secretary, Revenue Department and others …Respondents THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE B.SESHASAYANA REDDY Writ Petition No.18277 of 2007 ORDER: This writ petition has been filed by D.Narsing Rao assailing the action of the respondents in initiating proceedings under A.P.Land Encroachment Act, 1905 in respect of land admeasuring 165.5 Square Meters in H.No.5-5-88 (T.S.No.104, Ward No.47, Block-F, Nampally) situated at Gousepura, Darusalam, Hyderabad. 2. The petitioner claims that he purchased 165.5 Square Meters of site along with house therein in premises bearing No.5- 5-88(P) situated at Ghousepura, Darusalam, Hyderabad under a registered sale deed dated 30-8-2006 bearing Document No.3398 of 2006 executed by Sri D.Ramachandraiah and others for valuable consideration. While so, the Tahsildar, Nampally-3rd respondent herein issued notice under Section 7 of A.P.Land Encroachment Act (III of 1905) (for brevity, `the Act’) directing the petitioner to remove all the materials from the site and vacate the site within three days. The petitioner claims to have submitted an explanation to the notice dated 3.8.2007 on 9.8.2007. The 3rd respondent proceeded to pass final orders under Section 6 of the Act on 22.8.2007. Hence, this writ petition. 3. It is the grievance of the writ petitioner that he has been in occupation since the date of his purchase and the respondents without considering his explanation proceeded to pass final orders under Section 6 of the Act. The title of the property owned by the petitioner has been traced through Mr.Mohd Iqbal Ali Khan, who claims to have purchased the same through a registered sale deed dated 12.3.1981 bearing Document No.1172 of 1981 from Tafeeq Mohammed Khan. 4. Rule nisi came to be ordered on 30-8-2007. An interim direction has been granted on the even date directing the respondents not to dispossess the petitioner from the land in question, vide W.P.M.P.No.23463 of 2007. The respondents entered appearance and filed counter. They also moved W.V.M.P.No.1875 of 2010 with a prayer to vacate the interim order dated 23.8.2007 passed in W.P.M.P.No.23464 of 2007. 5. When the vacate stay petition came up for consideration, with the consent of counsel appearing for the parties, the writ petition is taken up for final disposal. 6. Heard learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and learned Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue appearing for the respondents. 7. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the predecessors in interest of the petitioner have been in occupation of the site in question right from the year 1981 and therefore, initiation of proceedings under the provisions of the Act are not warranted. In support of his submission, reliance has been placed on the decision of the Supreme Court in Government of A.P v. Thummala Krishna Rao and another[1] and a decision of this Court in Hyderabad Potteries Pvt. Ltd. v. Collector, Hyderabad District and another[2]. 8. Learned Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue submits that the petitioner having not submitted an explanation to the notice issued under Section 7 of the Act, cannot be permitted to question the validity of the order passed under Section 6 of the Act. 9. As seen from the material placed on record, the petitioner submitted an explanation to the notice dated 3.8.2007 issued under Section 7 of the Act. Photostat copy of the explanation has been placed on record. It bears the seal of the office of the third respondent. The third respondent proceeded to pass orders under Section 6 of the Act without considering the explanation submitted by the petitioner. Therefore, the order passed under Section 6 of the Act is in violation of the principles of natural justice and it suffers from legal infirmity. 10. Accordingly, the Writ Petition is allowed setting aside the notice dated 22.8.2007 issued under Section 6 of the A.P.Land Encroachment Act, 1905. The 3rd respondent is at liberty to consider the explanation dated 9.8.2007 submitted by the petitioner and pass appropriate orders thereon. No costs. _____________________ B.SESHASAYANA REDDY, J Dt. 26-07-2010 RAR THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE B.SESHASAYANA REDDY Writ Petition No.18277 of 2007 (Dated : 26-07-2010) [1] AIR 1982 SUPREME COURT 1081 [2] 2001(3) ALT 200