Constitution of India — Article 226
Writ of Mandamus — Interference with eviction proceedings — Scope.
High Court may interfere where statutory procedure under A.P. Land Encroachment Act is not duly followed and principles of natural justice are violated.
(Paras 2, 5)
A.P. Land Encroachment Act, 1905
Form‑7 notice — Explanation — Opportunity of hearing.
Proceedings under the Act require consideration of explanation submitted by alleged encroacher and conduct of enquiry after affording due opportunity to all concerned parties.
(Paras 2, 4, 5)
A.P. Land Encroachment Act, 1905
Form‑6 eviction order — Validity.
Form‑6 eviction order passed solely on the ground of non‑submission of written explanation, without conducting enquiry pursuant to Form‑7 notice, is unsustainable in law.
(Paras 2, 5)
Principles of Natural Justice
Audi alteram partem — Statutory eviction.
Before directing removal of alleged encroachments, the competent authority must hear affected persons, verify records and inspect subject land.
(Para 5)
Constitution of India — Article 300‑A
Right to property — Due process.
Dispossession of occupants without enquiry and adherence to procedure prescribed under law violates Article 300‑A of the Constitution of India.
(Paras 1, 5)
Administrative Law
Status quo — Interim protection.
Where eviction order is set aside and enquiry is directed, status quo as on the date of order is required to be maintained till conclusion of statutory proceedings.
(Para 5)
FACTS OF THE CASE
The petitioners are residents of Angaluru Village, Gudlavalleru Mandal, Krishna District, claiming possession of residential houses situated in:
R.S.No.326 and
R.S.No.329.
The 4th respondent–Tahsildar issued:
Form‑7 notice dated 24.06.2025 under the A.P. Land Encroachment Act, 1905, alleging encroachment.
Subsequently, the Tahsildar issued:
Form‑6 proceedings in R.C.A/171/2025 dated 10.07.2025, directing removal of alleged encroachments within seven days.
The ground stated in Form‑6 was that no explanation was submitted by the petitioners to the Form‑7 notice.
Aggrieved thereby, the petitioners approached the High Court under Article 226 contending that:
they had submitted oral explanations;
no enquiry was conducted;
eviction without due process violated the A.P. Land Encroachment Act and Article 300‑A.
Respondent No.5 was shown as complainant; however, notice to him was dispensed with as no prejudice would be caused.
ISSUES FOR CONSIDERATION
Whether the Form‑6 eviction order dated 10.07.2025 was passed in accordance with the procedure prescribed under the A.P. Land Encroachment Act, 1905?
Whether eviction proceedings could be sustained without consideration of explanation and without conducting statutory enquiry?
Whether interim protection and restoration of procedural safeguards were required?
ANALYSIS OF LAW AND FINDINGS
(A) Requirement under the A.P. Land Encroachment Act, 1905
The statutory scheme contemplates:
issuance of Form‑7 notice;
opportunity to submit explanation;
conduct of enquiry by the competent authority;
verification of revenue records and physical inspection;
passing of reasoned order thereafter.
The Act does not permit automatic eviction merely because written explanation was not filed.
(B) Failure of statutory enquiry
The impugned Form‑6 order was passed solely on the premise that no written explanation was submitted.
The Court held that:
even assuming no written explanation was filed,
the authority is still required to conduct enquiry,
hear affected parties, and
pass an order on merits.
Absence of enquiry renders the eviction order illegal.
(Paras 2–5)
(C) Opportunity of hearing
The learned Assistant Government Pleader fairly submitted that if written explanation is submitted, the same would be considered following due procedure.
Accepting the said submission, the Court restored the matter to the statutory authority.
(Para 4)
(D) Protection of property under Article 300‑A
The Court emphasized that:
even alleged encroachers cannot be dispossessed except by authority of law;
eviction without enquiry amounts to deprivation of property without due process.
Thus, interference under Article 226 was justified.
(Paras 1, 5)
(E) Relief moulded by the Court
Instead of adjudicating title or possession, the Court:
Set aside the Form‑6 eviction order dated 10.07.2025;
Permitted petitioners to submit written explanation within four weeks;
Directed Tahsildar to conduct full enquiry;
Mandated hearing of:
petitioners, and
respondent No.5;
Fixed outer time limit of three months for completion;
Directed status quo to be maintained till conclusion of enquiry.
(Para 5)
RATIO DECIDENDI
An eviction order under the A.P. Land Encroachment Act, 1905 issued in Form‑6 without conducting enquiry pursuant to Form‑7 notice, without verification of records and without affording opportunity of hearing to the affected persons, is violative of statutory procedure and principles of natural justice, and such order is liable to be set aside with a direction to conduct fresh enquiry in accordance with law, while maintaining status quo to protect possession under Article 300‑A of the Constitution of India.
FINAL ORDER
Form‑6 proceedings dated 10.07.2025 set aside.
Petitioners permitted to file explanation within four weeks.
Tahsildar directed to conduct enquiry and pass fresh orders within three months.
Status quo as on date of order to be maintained in respect of petitioners.
Writ petition disposed of.
No order as to costs.
No comments:
Post a Comment