Andhra Pradesh High Court - Amravati
K Sundara Rami Reddy vs Thummala Krishna Rao(Air 1982 Sc 1081) on 9 December, 2025
APHC010262872023
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH
AT AMARAVATI [3330]
(Special Original Jurisdiction)
TUESDAY, THE NINTH DAY OF DECEMBER
TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE TARLADA RAJASEKHAR RAO
WRIT PETITION No. 13628/2
13628/2023
BETWEEN:
1. K SUNDARA RAMI REDDY, S/o. LATE SUBBA REDDY, AGED
ABOUT 67 YEARS, OCC. AGRICULTURIST, R/O.
DASUKUPPAM VILLAGE, SATYAVEDU MANDAL, TIRUPATI
DISTRICT.
...PETITIONER
AND
1. THE STATE OF AP, REP.BY ITS PRL. SECRETARY, REVENUE
DEPARTMENT, S SECRETARIAT
ECRETARIAT BUILDINGS, VELAGAPUDI,
AMARAVATHI, GUNTUR DISTRICT.
2. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, COLLECTORATE COMPOUND,
TIRUPATI DISTRICT, TIRUPATI.
3. THE TAHSILDAR, MANDAL REVENUE OFFICE, SATYAVEDU
MANDAL, TIRUPATI DISTRICT.
4. THE STATION HOUSE OFFICER, SATYAVEDU POLICE
STATION, SATYAVEDU MANDAL, TIRUPATI DISTRICT.
5. K J SRAVAN KUMAR, S/O. K, JANARDHAN, AGED ABOUT 37
YEARS, R/O. D.NO.722, SATYAVEDU ROAD, DASUKUPPAM
VILLAGE, SATYAVEDU MANDAL, TIRUPATI DISTRICT.
...RESPONDENT(S):
2
Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying that
in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High
Court may be pleased to issue a Writ or direction or order one more
particularly in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of
the 3rd respondent in without issuing eviction notice trying to evict the
Petitioner, under Section 6 of A.P. Land encroachment Act, without
assigning any reasons and considering our objections to an extent of
Ac.0.10 cents in Sy.No.8/5A of Dasukuppam Village, Satyavedu
Mandal, Tirupati District, as illegal, arbitrary, contrary to principles of
natural justice and contrary to the law laid down by the Apex court in
Govt.of A.P. Vs. Thummala Krishna Rao(AIR 1982 SC 1081), and
Hon'ble High court of A.P. held in Kadiyala Sudhershan Vs. Govt.of
A.P.(2013 (5) ALD 212), Parchiri Srinivasulu VS. The State of A.P. and
Ors (MANU/AP/1199/2021), and in violation of Articles 14, 19 and 300A
of Constitution Of India and consequently direct the respondents not to
evict the Petitioner from the above subject property to an extent of
Ac.0.10 cents in Sy.No.8/5A of Dasukuppam Village, Satyavedu
Mandal, Tirupati District, and pass such other order or order.
Counsel for the Petitioner:
1. NAIDU SIVA RAMA KRISHNA
Counsel for the Respondent(S):
1. GP FOR HOME
2. GP FOR REVENUE
3. V VINOD K REDDY
The Court made the following:
3
ORDER:
The present Writ petition is filed not to evict the petitioner without issuing eviction notice as contemplated under Section 6 of the Land Encroachment Act, and the 3rd respondent is trying to evict the petitioner without invoking the provisions under the A.P. Land Encroachment Act, without issuing any notice and without calling for objections from the petitioner for the land to an extent of Ac.0.10 cents in Survey No.8/5/A, Dasukuppam Village, Satyavedu mandal, Tirupati District, amounts to violation of principles of natural justice and the said act of the respondents is arbitrary, illegal and contrary to the law laid down by the Apex Court in the judgment of Government of Andhra Pradesh v. Thummala Krishna Rao1 and also contrary to the Judgment of erstwhile High Court of Andhra Pradesh in Kadiyala Sudhershan v. Government of Andhra Pradesh2 and Judgment in Parchiri Srinivasulu v. The State of A.P. & ors3 .
2. The judgment popularly known as Thummala Krishna Rao's case (referred supra 1) is applicable only when there is a genuine dispute in between the petitioner and the Government. Upon reviewing the affidavit filed in support of the Writ Petition, there is no such averment 1 AIR 1982 SC 1081 2 2013 (5) ALD 212 3 Manu/AP/1199/2021 4 that raises a genuine dispute in between the petitioner and the unofficial respondent.
3. Learned counsel Sri V. Vinokd K Reddy for the unofficial respondents submit that, the unofficial respondent No.5 had filed an earlier writ petition being W.P. No.4180 of 2023. The said Writ Petition was disposed of on 07.03.2023. This made the following order.
"1. The respondent No.6-The Assistant Engineer with the assistance of the 7th respondent, shall conduct a survey to demarcate the kalava poramboke and the road margins of the subject site at Sy.Nos.8/5A and 9 of Daskuppam village, Satyavedu Mandal, Tirupati District. This survey shall be conducted in the presence of the petitioner or his representative and in the presence of the respondent No.8 or his representatives.
2. For the purpose of enabling these persons to be present at the time of the survey, notices shall be given to the petitioner and respondent No.8.
3. After the survey is conducted, if it is found that the respondent No.8 have encroached into the kalava poramboke and road margin, it would be open to the respondents to take appropriate action in accordance with the law."
4. The 5th respondent further stated that in pursuance of the order in W.P. No.4180 of 2023, the survey was conducted in the presence of the petitioner herein and it was found that the petitioner was not in the 5 possession of the land and he was declared as encroacher. The counsel further submits that the petitioner is guilty of suppression of material fact and has not come up with clean hands and tactfully filed the present Writ Petition not to evict the petitioner without following due process of law.
5. This Writ petition is filed frivolously circumventing the law. Hence, the Writ Petition is dismissed. There shall be no order as to costs.
As a sequel, interlocutory applications, if any pending in this Writ Petition shall stand closed.
___________________________________ JUSTICE TARLADA RAJASEKHAR RAO Date: 09.12.2025 Harin 6 137 THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE TARLADA RAJASEKHAR RAO W.P.No. 13628 OF 2023 Date: 09.12.2025 Harin