Due process requires that explanations from encroachers be considered prior to any eviction action, reaffirming rights under Articles 14 and 21 of the Constitution.

ORDER :

1. The present Writ Petition is filed to declare the action of the respondents in attempting to dispossess the petitioners from their long-standing peaceful possession and enjoyment of the respective lands in Survey Nos. 124, 125, 126 and 160 situated at Somaladoddi village, Anantapuramu Rural Mandal, without considering the explanations submitted by the petitioners pursuant to the Notices dated 07.08.2025 in Rc. No.B/455/2025 issued under Section 7 of the A.P. Land Encroachment Act, 1905, by the 4^th respondent, and in violation of the status-quo orders granted by this Court in W.P. No.16267 of 2024, as arbitrary, illegal, unconstitutional and violative of Articles 14 and 21 of the Constitution of India and consequently to direct the respondents particularly Respondent No.4 not to take any coercive steps against the petitioners’ huts on the subject land.

2. Precisely the Writ Petition is filed on the ground that without considering the explanations offered by the petitioners, the present impugned notices came to be issued under Section 7 of A.P. Land Encroachment Act, 1905 (for short Act).

3. The procedure contemplated under Section 6 of the Act, to hold a summary inquiry into the facts of the case, means not to evict forcibly without taking into consideration the explanation offered by the encroachers. To fortify the said contention, this Court places reliance of the judgment of the common High Court of Andhra Pradesh in the case of Pre. Jothi Education Society vs Secretary, Major Irrigation , 2002 (6) ALD 83 .The Division Bench of the High Court held in the following:

“Since the respondents passed the order under Section 6 of the Encroachment Act on 28.4.2001 without considering the objections of the petitioner, in order to meet the ends of justice, the order passed by the respondents under Section 6 of the Encroachment Act on 28.4.2001 has to be set aside and we do so. Since we have held that the notice dated 18.4.2001 issued by the respondents under Section 7 of the Encroachment Act is a proper notice and the objections filed by the petitioner on 30.4.2001 have not been considered, we permit the respondents to pass appropriate order in the light of the objections filed on 30.4.2001 by the petitioner to the Sec.7 notice, according to law. Pending a decision by the respondents as directed by us, no coercive steps shall be taken against the petitioner by the respondents.”

4. After hearing both learned counsel for the petitioners and learned State Counsel, the above referred judgment is squarely applicable to the present facts of the case.

5. Hence, the present Writ Petition is disposed of directing the respondents to examine the explanations submitted by the petitioners and pass appropriate orders in accordance with law and communicate the decision to the petitioners. Till the decision is taken, the respondents are directed not to take any coercive steps against the petitioners’ property. There shall be no order as to costs.

As a sequel, interlocutory applications, if any pending shall stand closed.