::1:: APHC010291402025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3329] MONDAY,THE ELEVENTH DAY OF AUGUST TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE VENKATESWARLU NIMMAGADDA WRIT PETITION NO: 14467/2025 Between: 1. RUDDAIYAGARI CHANDRASHEKAR, S/O. RODDAPPA, AGED 79 YEARS, OCC CULTIVATION, R/O. GOLLAPALLI VILLAGE, GORANTIA MANDAL, SRISATHYA SAI DISTRICT (ERSTWHILE ANANTAPURAMU) DISTRICT. ...PETITIONER AND 1. THE STATE OF AP, REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, PANCHAYAT RAJ AND RURAL DEVELOPMENT, DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT, VELAGAPUDI, AMARAVATI, GUNTUR DISTRICT. 2. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR PANCHAYAT WING, SRI SATHYA SAI DISTRICT, ERSTWHILE ANANTHAPURAMU DISTRICT. 3. THE DISTRICT PANCHAYAT OFFICER, SRI SATHYA, SAI DISTRICT, ERSTWHILE ANANTHAPURAMU, DISTRICT. 4. THE MANDAL PRAJA PARISHAD DEVELOPMENT OFFICER, GORANTLA MANDAL, SRI SATHYA SAI, DISTRICT, ERSTWHILE ANANTHAPURAMU DISTRICT. 5. THE TAHSILDAR, GORANTLA MANDAL, SRI SATHYA SAI DISTRICT, ERSTWHILE ANANTHAPURAMU DISTRICT. 6. THE VADIGEPALLI GRAM PANCHAYAT, REP. BY ITS EXECUTIVE AUTHORITY CUM PANCHAYAT SECRETARY, VADIGEPAILI VILLAGE, GORANTIA MANDAL, SRI SATHYA SAI DISTRICT. ...RESPONDENT(S): 2 This Court made the following ORDER:- 1. This writ petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking the following relief: “to issue a writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of WRIT OF MANDAMUS declaring the action of the Respondents more particularly Respondent Nos 4 to 6 and their subordinates in contemplating to form the Road through Petitioner’s land admeasuring Ac.2.35 Cents respectively covered by Sy. Nos 62-2 of Vadigepalli Village, Gorantla Mandal, Sri Sathya Sai District (Erstwhile Ananthapuramu) District, as illegal, irregular, irrational, without any authority of law and violative of provisions of Andhra Pradesh Panchayat Raj Act, 1994 and offends Articles 14, 21 and 300- A of Constitution of India and consequently direct the Respondents particularly Respondent 4 to 6 and their subordinates not to interfere in any manner with Nos Petitioners possession over the said lands, not to form any road thereon and pass.....” 2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Government Pleader for Panchayat Raj and Rural Development appearing for the respondent Nos. 1 to 5 and the learned Standing counsel for the Grampanchayat appearing for the respondent No.6. 3. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is the absolute owner and possessor of the subject land 3 in Sy. No.62-2, admeasuring Ac.2.35 cents, situated at Vadigepalli Village, Gorantla Mandal, Sri Sathya Sai District (erstwhile Ananthapuramu District). While so, the respondent authorities, particularly the respondent Nos.5 and 6, are trying to lay a road through the petitioner’s land without issuing any notice to the petitioner and without following due procedure as contemplated under the provisions of the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013, and in violation of the provisions of the Andhra Pradesh Panchayat Raj Act, 1994. Hence, the present writ petition. 4. On the other hand, the learned Standing counsel for the respondent No.6 Gram Panchayat furnished written instructions dated 19.06.2025, wherein it is stated as follows:- “It is submitted that the road which is going to be laid is in Rastha which is Grama Kanram land in the Sy.No.62/5. It is further submitted that this Grampanchayat started the work not laying the road in the petitioner’s property which is in Sy.No.62/2”. 4 5. The learned Standing Counsel for the 6th respondent Gram Panchayat submits that the 6th respondent Gram Panchayat has already commenced the work of laying the road in Sy. No.62/5 only, and not in Sy. No.62/2 as alleged by the petitioner, and further contends that the respondents are not interfering with the peaceful possession and enjoyment of the petitioner’s subject land. 6. Heard the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioner, the learned Government Pleader for Panchayat Raj and Rural Development appearing for respondent Nos.1 to 5, and the learned Standing Counsel for the Gram Panchayat appearing for respondent No.6, and perused the material available on record. 7. After considering the facts and circumstances as stated supra, this Court is of the considered opinion that, in view of the clear and categorical admission made by the learned counsel for the respondents that the respondents are not laying any road through the petitioner’s land in Sy. No.62/2 and they are not interfering with the peaceful possession and enjoyment of the petitioner’s subject land, more so, that the subject road is being laid in Sy. No.62/5 as admitted in their written instructions, the respondents are at liberty to proceed with the road work, subject to 5 obtaining other required permissions. However, if, as alleged by the petitioner, the respondents intend to interfere with the peaceful possession and enjoyment of the petitioner’s property or to lay any road in Sy. No.62/2 to an extent of Ac.2.35 cents, they shall adhere to the due process of law as contemplated under the provisions of the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013 and the Andhra Pradesh Panchayat Raj Act, 1994. Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of. No costs. As a sequel, interlocutory applications if any pending, shall stand closed. _____________________________________ JUSTICE VENKATESWARLU NIMMAGADDA 11.08.2025 klk 6 207 THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE VENAKTESWARLU NIMMAGADDA WRIT PETITION NO.14467 of 2025 11.08.2025 klk