Back
ANDHRA PRADESH HIGH COURT AT AMARAVATHI
M. Satyanarayana Murthy, J.
Y. Raghuramaiah - Appellant
Versus
State of Andhra Pradesh - Respondent
Writ Petition No. 14375 of 2021
Decided On : 21-07-2021
LAND ENCROACHMENT - ANDHRA PRADESH LAND ENCROACHMENT ACT, 1905 - SECTION 6, 7 - NOTICE UNDER SECTION 6 - VALIDITY - REASONS - OPPORTUNITY OF HEARING - REQUIREMENT - ADVERSE POSSESSION - TITLE TO PROPERTY - DISPUTE - SUMMARY EVICTION - LEGALITY.
Fact of the Case:
Petitioner challenged the notice issued under Section 6 of the Andhra Pradesh Land Encroachment Act, 1905 (A.P.L.E. Act), alleging that the land in question was not government land and that he had been in possession of it since 1988. He contended that the notice was issued without any reasons and without giving him an opportunity of hearing, in violation of the principles of natural justice.
Finding of the Court:
The court held that the notice under Section 6 of the A.P.L.E. Act was invalid as it was not supported by any reasons and was issued without giving the petitioner an opportunity of hearing. The court also held that the petitioner had been in possession of the land for more than 30 years and had perfected his title to the property by virtue of adverse possession.
Issues: 1. Whether the notice under Section 6 of the A.P.L.E. Act was valid. 2. Whether the petitioner had perfected his title to the property by virtue of adverse possession.
Ratio Decidendi: 1. The court relied on the judgment of the High Court of Judicature at Hyderabad in Kadiyala Sudershan and others Vs. Government of Andhra Pradesh, 2013 (6) ALT 42, which held that an eviction notice prescribed under Section 6 of the A.P.L.E. Act must be supported by reasons and after giving show-cause notice under Section 7 of the Act and after giving an opportunity of hearing to the persons in possession of the subject land. 2. The court also relied on the judgment of the Supreme Court in State of Andhra Pradesh Vs. Thummala Krishna Rao, 1982 (2) SCC 134, which held that a person in settled possession cannot be evicted by adopting summary procedure from the land.
Final Decision: The court set aside the notice under Section 6 of the A.P.L.E. Act and directed the respondents not to dispossess the petitioner from the subject land till taking appropriate action strictly adhering to the principle laid down in Kadiyala Sudershan and others (referred supra).
JUDGMENT
This writ petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking the following relief:
2. The case of the petitioner is that the petitioner’s family members are in possession and enjoyment of the land in an extent of Ac.0-08 cents in Sy.No.348-A of Kommipadu Village, Sydapuram Mandal, SPSR Nellore District since 1988 and since then they have been residing there by constructing a house. The petitioner is in continuous possession and enjoyment of the said land without any interruption from any corner whatsoever including the respondents herein and they obtained electricity connection and their house property was assessed by the Gram Panchayat, imposed house tax and they are paying electricity bill and house tax regularly.
3. While so, when the officials of the 4th respondent tried to evict the petitioner forcibly, the petitioner’s father along with three other similarly situated persons filed W.P.No.20859 of 2020 before this Hon’ble Court seeking a direction not to dispossess them from their respective house sites. This Court passed an interim order dated 17.11.2020 directing the respondents not to dispossess the petitioner therein from the subject land, if they are in possession of the subject land without following due process of law. The respondent authorities kept quiet for some time and on 02.07.2021, the 4th respondent herein, vide letter in Rc.B.114/2021, dated 02.07.2021, directed the Assistant Engineer, Electricity Department, Sydapuram to disconnect power supply to the electrical service connection bearing No.3112324000459 provided to the petitioner’s house as the land in Sy.No.348/A was handed over for construction of Village Secretariat. In turn the Assistant Engineer, Operations, APSPDCL, Sydapuram issued Lr.No.AG/0/Syd/F/D.No.766/21 dated 02.07.2021, informing that their electrical service connections will be disconnected within 7 days. Being aggrieved by the said action, this petitioner and three other similarly situated persons filed W.P.No.13218 of 2021 before this Court and the same was allowed by order dated 09.07.2021, setting aside the above two proceedings and directed the respondents not to dispossess the petitioner therein except by following due process of law.
4. Meanwhile, after passing the order, the 4th respondent issued Eviction Notice under Section (7) of Andhra Pradesh Land Encroachment Act III of 1905, (for short ‘A.P.L.E. Act’) vide Rc.B.114/2021 dated 02.07.2021, alleging that the petitioner is found to be in unauthorized occupation of the shop admeasuring Ac.0.05 cents situated in Sy.No.348-A of Kommipadu Village, Sydapuram Mandal, SPSR Nellore District.
5. In the schedule, classification of the land was mentioned as ‘Patta’ and the nature of occupation was mentioned as ‘Government Land Encroachment’. The said notice was served on the petitioner on 06.07.2021. Immediately the petitioner submitted his explanation on 08.07.2021 categorically stating that the said land is not Government land and he has been in possession and enjoyment of the land since 1988 and requested to drop the further proceedings.
6. Challenging the said notice issued under Section 7 of the Act, the petitioner filed W.P.No.14070 of 2021 on the ground that the 4th respondent has no power or authority to initiate proceedings under Andhra Pradesh Land Encroachment Act, 1905 as the said land is classified as ‘Pat
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
