::1:: APHC010259342024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3329] WEDNESDAY, THE TWENTIETH DAY OF AUGUST TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE VENKATESWARLU NIMMAGADDA WRIT PETITION NO: 12803/2024 Between: 1. MALLELA LEELAVATHI, W/O VENKATESWARLU, AGE ABOUT 52 YEARS, R/O H.NO.3-16, 5TH WARD, MANNAVA VILLAGE OF PONNUR MANDAL, GUNTUR DISTRICT. ...PETITIONER AND 1. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP.BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, PANCHAYAT RAJ DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT BUILDINGS, VELAGAPUDI, AMARAVATHI. 2. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, GUNTUR DISTRICT, GUNTUR. 3. THE SUBCOLLECTOR, , GUNTUR DISTRICT, GUNTUR. 4. THE TAHSILDHAR, PONNUR MANDAL, PONNUR, GUNTUR DISTRICT. 5. THE MANNAVA GRAM PANCHAYAT, REP. BY ITS SECRETARY, MANNAVA VILLAGE, PONNUR MANDAL, GUNTUR DISTRICT. 6. GOLLA YANADI RAO, S/O. KOTAIAH, HINDU, AGED ABOUT 48 YEARS, OCC. AGRICULTURALIST, R/O. D.NO. 4-45/1, MANNAVA VILLAGE, PONNUR MANDAL, GUNTUR ::2:: DISTRICT, ANDHRA PRADESH. R6 IS IMPLEADED AS PER COURT'S ORDER DT. 04.03.2025 IN IA 02 OF 2024. ...RESPONDENT(S): 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 tomay be pleased to issue an appropriate Writ, Order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the 5th respondent in issuing the notice vide Rc. No.6/2024 dated 10-06-2024, for demolition of petitioners house within seven (7) days, which is constructed on Ac.0.02 cents in Sy.No.418/1 situated at Mannava village, Ponnur Mandal, Guntur District, as illegal, arbitrary, violation of report submitted by the 4th respondent and in violation of principles of natural justice and consequently direct the resopndents not to demolish the RCC building of the petitoiner, which was constructed in 2 (two) cents of land in Sy.No.418/1, situated at Mannava village, Ponnur Mandal, Guntur District and pass such Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. U RAMANJANEYULU Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. GP FOR REVENUE 2. GP FOR PANCHAYAT RAJ RURAL DEV 3. LEO LAW ASSOCIATES LLP 4. Mattegunta.Sudhir,Standing Counsel For Z.P.Ps,M.P.Ps,Gram Panchayats ::3:: THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE VENKATESWARLU NIMMAGADDA WRIT PETITION NO:12803/2024 This Court made the following ORDER: Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned Government Pleader for Respondent Nos.1 to 4, learned Standing Counsel for the 5th respondent and learned counsel for 6th respondent and perused the material placed on record. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is pattadar and possessor of an extent of Ac.0.50 cents in Sy.No.418/1 situated at Mannava Village, Ponnur Mandal, Guntur District having acquired the same through her father-in-law being a legal heir. Since the date of acquisition, the petitioner has been in possession and enjoyment of the subject property. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that before his inheritance of the subject property of Ac.0.50 cents from her father-in-law, an extent of Ac.0.07 cents was acquired for construction of drainage by the 5th respondent – Gram Panchayat in the year 1999. Later the 3rd and 4th respondents herein acquired another extent of Ac.0.41 cents out of Ac.0.43 cents for providing house site pattas to homeless poor people in the year 2007, by leaving Ac.0.02 cents to the petitioner. He further submits that the ::4:: petitioner got constructed a house at the remaining extent of land after acquisition i.e., Ac.0.02 cents. Without considering the said fact, the respondent No.5 – Gram Panchayat issued impugned notice alleging that the petitioner is an encroacher of the subject land is contrary to the revenue record and constitutional right of the petitioner and even though the respondent Nos.3 and 5 admitted the title of the petitioner while acquiring the property of the petitioner. Hence the writ petition. 3. On the other hand, the 6th respondent herein filed material papers wherein it is stated that as per revenue records Sy.No.480-1 is consisting of Ac.0.50 cents and out of that vide an Award No.13/1999 an extent of Ac.0.07 cents were acquired. Thereafter another extent of Ac.0.41 cents of land out of remaining extent of Ac.0.43 cents was also acquired vide an Award No.12/2007. Therefore, as per revenue records, the petitioner was leftover with an extent of Ac.0.02 cents only. Pursuant to the complaint of the villagers including the 6th respondent herein and in view of directions of this Court, the 4th respondent herein conducted survey and demarcated after following due procedure as contemplated under A.P. Survey and Boundaries Act, 1923 wherein it is found that the petitioner is holding physically an extent of Ac.0.01 cents but as per ::5:: document she was declared and holding an extent of Ac.0.02 cents. It is further stated that the said extent of land was still set apart as vacant but she got constructed by occupying the drainage and other Government land in an extent of Ac.0.04 cents, for which the respondent Gram Panchayat issued notices alleging that the petitioner encroached the subject land and constructed subject house property in encroached land only. 4. Learned Standing Counsel for 5th respondent also filed counter, wherein it stated as under: “m) It is respectfully submitted that the writ petitioner since started constructing the RCC building by encroaching an extent of 0.03 ½ cents in Sy.No.418-B which is a communal site of Indiramma Housing Colony and also by further encroaching an extent of 0.0½ cent in Sy.No.418-1A of Kollimarla Drain Bund, thus a total extent of 0.04 cents has been encroached upon and started constructing RCC building without even obtaining any building permission from this answering respondent and therefore initially, this answering respondent issued notice, dt.23.09.2021 but the petitioner filed writ petition before this Hon’ble Court in W.P.No.25115/2021 which has been clubbed with WP (PIL) No.157/2021. The Hon’ble division bench of this Hon’ble Court was pleased to disposed of the said batch of cases on 20.10.2022 wherein the executive authority i.e., Panchayat Secretary of the respective Gram Panchayats shall identify the Gram Panchayat lands which are unauthorized occupied/encroached and shall take steps for removal of the said encroachments in accordance with law within a period of six months. n) Respectfully submit that the Tahsildar, Ponnur i.e., the 4th respondent herein, after conducting a thorough enquiry issued proceedings in Rc.No.1014/2021-DT, dated 03.10.2021, holding that only Ac.0.01 cents situated in Sy.No.418-1B1 is in possession of the Writ Petitioner herein. I respectfully submit that even in the said 1 cent, there are tombs of the Writ Petitioner’s ancestors and in fact no land is in possession of the Writ Petitioner, and the entire RCC structure of 4 cents is illegally encroached.” ::6:: 5. Learned Standing Counsel further submits that the 5th Respondent – Gram Panchayat as well as 4th respondent pursuant to the directions of this Court in W.P.No.8344/2023 conducted survey, wherein it is found that the petitioner encroached an extent of Ac.0.04 cents and constructed a house keeping her Ac.0.01 cents of site idle of the vacant site which is western side of the subject house property. 6. Considering the submissions made by all learned counsels and material placed on record, it appears that originally the petitioner is pattadar and possessor of the land an extent of Ac.0.50 cents in Sy.No.418/1 having acquired the same through her predecessors by way of succession. It is observed that after having survey by the 4th respondent herein and 7th respondent in W.P8344/2023 it is found that the petitioner is holding physically an extent of Ac.0.01 cents out of Ac.0.50 cents after acquiring the said land by the respondents. The survey further confirmed that the petitioner got constructed RCC building in an extent of Ac.0.04 cents by encroaching an extent of 0.03½ cents in Sy.No.418-B which is a communal site of Indiramma Housing Colony and also further encroached an extent of Ac.0.0 ½ cents in Sy.No.418-1A of Kollimarla Drain Bund i.e., thus a total extent of Ac.0.04 cents has been encroached by the petitioner and got constructed RCC building even without there being any ::7:: permission or approval from the concerned authorities i.e., the 5th respondent – Gram Panchayat. As contended by learned counsel for the 6th respondent the petitioner herein encroached an extent of Ac.0.04 cents in Sy.No.418/B and 418/A on the guise of her land i.e., Ac.0.02 cents in Sy.No.418-1 which is still vacant and stands on the western side of the petitioner’s house is valid and acceptable in view of the survey and demarcation report as well as counter filed by the 6th respondent and also the said fact revealed from the impugned notice issued by the 5th respondent. 7. In view of the reasons stated as above, the 5th respondent – Gram Panchayat is at liberty to proceed further by following due process of law and governing rules. 8. With the above observations, the Writ Petition is disposed of. No costs. Consequently, Miscellaneous Petitions, if any, pending in this Writ Petition shall stand closed. _____________________________________ VENKATESWARLU NIMMAGADDA,J 20.08.2025 KRK ::8:: THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE VENKATESWARLU NIMMAGADDA 134 WRIT PETITION NO: 12803 of 2024 20.08.2025 krk