A single-judge bench comprising of Hon’ble justice M. Satyanarayana Murthy. The Petition was filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India to issue a Writ of Mandamus. In the Petition, the eviction of the Petitioner from the land was challenged. The eviction notice was given to Petitioner under section-7 of the A.P. Land Encroachment Act, 1905.
In this case, the petitioner was evicted from the land by issuing eviction notice under section-7 of the A.P. Land Encroachment Act, 1905 in respect of the land in an extent of Ac.6-54 cents in Sy. No. 873 of Bogole, SPSR Nellore district. The eviction was made on the ground that the land from which eviction was done was government land. The Petitioner filed the Writ Petition before the Court challenging the action of the Respondents as illegal, arbitrary and violative of Article 300-A of the Constitution of India.
The learned counsel for the Petitioners contended that the land in question was not a government land but was Inam land. Therefore, the question of encroachment wouldn’t arise.
The Respondent no. 1 issued notice to the Petitioner to give an explanation to the show cause notice, but without any enquiry, the Respondent was allotting house site plots in the disputed land. The learned counsel for the Respondents requested to dismiss the plea on the grounds that the Petitioner need to follow the procedure prescribed under Section-10 of the Encroachment Act 1905.
The explanation to the show cause notice demanded by the Petitioner under Section -7 of the Land Encroachment Act, 1905 was submitted by the Petitioner within the stipulated time. The Respondent upon receiving the explanation had not taken any steps further. The contention that the land was not a government land but was Inam land cannot be decided by the Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India as it is a disputed fact.
The Court directed the Respondents not to dispossess the Petitioner from the subject land, except by following the procedure under Section-6 and 7 of the A.P. Land Encroachment Act, 1905. The Court said that the eviction of the Petitioner was“as illegal, arbitrary and violative of articles 300-A of the Constitution of India, consequently set aside the impugned notice, dated 31.07.2020 by directing the Respondents to consider the request of the Petitioners and issue pattas in their favour.” The petition was disposed and no costs were allowed.
Libertatem.in is now on Telegram. Follow us for regular legal updates and judgment from courts. Follow us on Google News, Instagram, LinkedIn, Facebook & Twitter. You can subscribe to our Weekly Email Updates. You can also contribute stories like this and help us spread awareness for a better society. Submit Your Post Now.