PHC010167132025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3328] MONDAY, THE TWENTY FIRST DAY OF APRIL TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE GANNAMANENI RAMAKRISHNA PRASAD WRIT PETITION NO: 8666/2025 Between: 1. GUNDUMALLA SARASWATHI, W/O. RAMACHANDRUDU AGED ABOUT 63 YEARS, OCC HOUSEWIFE, R/O. D.NO. 16/446, NADIMPALLI, PRODDATURTOWN, PRODDATUR MANDAL, YSR KADAPA DISTRICT. ...PETITIONER AND 1. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, PANCHAYTRAJ AND RURAL DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT SECRETARIAT BULDINGS, VELAGAPUDI, AMARAVATHI, GUNTUR DISTRICT, A.P 2. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, REVENUE DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT BULDINGS, VELAGAPUDI, AMARAVATHI, GUNTUR DISTRICT, A.P. 3. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, KADAPA, YSR KADAPA DISTRICT. 4. THE MANDAL REVENUE OFFICER, PRODDATUR, YSR KADAPA DISTRICT ANDHRA PRADESH. 5. THE KOTHAPALLE GRAM PANCHAYAT, REPRESENTED BY ITS PANCHAYATH SECRETARY, KOTHAPALLE VILLAGE, PRODDATUR MANDAL, ANDHRA PRADESH. 6. THE DEPUTY ENGINEER, R AND B DEPARTMENT, PRODDATUR, YSR KADAPA DISTRICT, ANDHRA PRADESH. 7. THE ASSISTANT ENGINEER, R AND B DEPARTMENT, PRODDATUR, YSR KADAPA DISTRICT, ANDHRA PRADESH. 2 ...RESPONDENT(S): Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. V NITESH Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. GP FOR PANCHAYAT RAJ RURAL DEV 2. GP FOR ROADS BUILDINGS 3. GP FOR REVENUE 4. MATTEGUNTA.SUDHIR,STANDING COUNSEL FOR Z.P.PS,M.P.PS, GRAM PANCHAYATS The Court made the following: ORAL ORDER: Heard Sri Chilkuri Karthik, learned Counsel appearing on behalf of Sri V. Nitesh, learned Counsel for the Writ Petitioner, Sri Panku Rajesh Kumar, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Panchayat Raj & Rural Development and Sri P.A.K. Yadav, learned Counsel representing Sri M. Sudhir, learned Standing Counsel for Gram Panchayat. 2. Sri P.A.K. Yadav, learned Counsel has submitted the Written Instructions furnished by the Panchayat Secretary of Kothapalli Gram Panchayat, dated 19.04.2025. Copy of it is supplied to the Counsel for the Writ Petitioner and the same is taken on record. 3. The relevant portion of the Written Instructions is usefully extracted hereunder: “It is submitted that this respondent is not interfering with the property of the petitioner at any point of time bearing Door No. 11/626 with assessment No. 5551 situated in Sy No. 160/3A, 160/4, 161/1A, 160/4A, Kothapalle gram panchayat Proddatur Mandal, YSR Kadapa District. This respondent did not issue any notices to the petitioner and not taking steps to demolish the petitioner's property in the subject land. Further, I stated that, the site on which are constructing drainage, which is claimed by the petitioner that the above 3 said site purely belongs to the Departments of Road & Buildings and the Department of Revenue. It is Further Submitted that the Panchayat Secretary of Kothapalli Gram Panchayat collected all types of taxes belongs to the petitioner sites as per guidelines. For giving services from the Gram Panchayat but, the Panchayat Secretary was not played any role in land pulling process of petitioner site. The petitioner said site purely belongs to Roads &Buildings and Revenue Department.” 4. Learned Counsel for the Writ Petitioner would submit that the present Writ Petition may be dismissed at the admission stage because the Panchayat Secretary has stated in the Written Instructions that the Panchayat (5th respondent) is not interfering with the property of the Petitioner at any point of time bearing Door No.11/626 with Assessment No.5551 situated in Sy No. 160/3A, 160/4, 161/1A, 160/4A, Kothapalle gram panchayat Proddatur Mandal, YSR Kadapa District. It is also stated that the site on which the drainage is being constructed purely belongs to the Department of Road & Buildings and the Department of Revenue. 5. With these observations and directions, this Writ Petition stands disposed of in terms of the above extract of the Written Instructions. No order as to costs. 6. Needless to state that the Official Respondents are obligated to follow the due process of law, if any coercive action is sought to be initiated against the Writ Petitioner in respect of the subject property. 7. Interlocutory Applications, if any, stand closed in terms of this order. ______________________________________ GANNAMANENIRAMAKRISHNA PRASAD, J Dt: 21.04.2025 DSV