APHC010459862025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) TUESDAY, THE SECOND DAY OF SEPTEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE VENKATESWARLU NIMMAGADDA WRIT PETITION NO: 23279 OF 2025 Between: Athar Jaheed Hussain, S/o Late A. Nazeer Hussain, aged about 49 Years, R/o. 12-106-B, Shiva Nandi Nagar, Banaganapalle Village and Mandal, Nandyala District, Andhra Pradesh - 518124. ...Petitioner AND 1. The State of Andhra Pradesh, Rep. by its Principal Secretary, Municipal Administration and Urban Development Department, A.P. Secretariat, Velagapudi, Amaravati, Guntur District 2. The State of Andhra Pradesh, Rep by its Principal Secretary, Department of Energy, Secretariat Buildings, Velagapudi, Guntur District, Andhra Pradesh. 3. The Andhra Pradesh Southern Power Distribution Co Ltd, (APSPDCL), Rep by its Chairman and MD, Vidyut Nilayam, Kesavayana Gunta, Tirupati, Andhra Pradesh 4. The Superintendent Engineer, APSPDCL, Operation Circle, Nandyala, Nandyala District, Andhra Pradesh 5. The Assistant Executive Engineer, APSPDCL, Banaganapalle, Banaganapalle Village and Mandal. Nandyala District, Andhra Pradesh. \ s. The Banaganapalle Gram Panchayath, Rep by its Executive Officer (Panchayat Secretary) Banaganapalle Village and Mandal, Nandyala District, Andhra Pradesh. % ...Respondents praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased to grant a direction or writ more particularly in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the actions of the Respondent No. 6 in issuing the Notices dated 29.08.2025, thereby threatening possession and demolish the property of the Petitioner at having an extent of 561.55 Sq. yards in Sy. No. 163 situated in Banaganapalle Village and Mandal, Nandyala District, Andhra Pradesh provisions of the AP Panchayat Raj Act, 1994, Andhra Pradesh Metropolitan Region and Urban Development Authorities Act, 2016 14, 19(1)(g) and 21 of the Indian Constitution and Notice dated 29.08.2025 issued by the 6'^ Respondent. lA NO: 1 OF 20?.*; Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court stay the Show Cause Notices dated 29.08.2025 issued by the 6th Respondent during the pendency of the writ petition. lA NO: 2 OF 7091^ Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India to interfere with the as illegal, arbitrary, contrary to and violative of Article consequently set aside the may be pleased to Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to direct the Respondent Nos. 4 and 5 to restore the power connection of seven shops situated in the property of the Petitioner Sy. No. 163 situated i Banaganapalle Village and Mandal, Nandyala District in Andhra Pradesh, pending disposal of the Writ Petition. % Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI VARUN BYREDDY Counsel for the Respondent No.1: GP FOR MUNICIPAL ADMINISTRATION & URBAN DEVELOPMENT Counsel for the Respondent No.2: GP FOR ENERGY Counsel for the Respondents 3 to 5: SRI VENKATA RAMA RAO SC FOR APSPDCL Counsel for the Respondent No.6: SRI M. SUDIR, SC FOR GRAM PANCHAYAT The Court made the following order: APHC010459862025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3329] Bite TUESDAY.THE SECOND DAY OF SEPTEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE VENKATESWARLU NIMMAGADDA WRIT PETITION NO: 23279/2025 Between: 1.ATHAR JAHEED HUSSAIN, S/O LATE A. NAZEER HUSSAIN, AGED R/0. 12-106-B, SHIVA NANDI NAGAR, ABOUT 49 YEARS, BANAGANAPALLE VILLAGE AND MANDAL, NANDYALA DISTRICT ANDHRA PRADESH - 518124. ...PETITIONER AND 1.THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL MUNICIPAL ADMINISTRATION AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT A.P. SECRETARIAT, VELAGAPUDI, AMARAVATI, GUNTUR DISTRICT SECRETARY 2.THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP BY ITS PRINCIPAL DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY VELAGAPUDI, GUNTUR DISTRICT, ANDHRA SECRETARY, SECRETARIAT BUILDINGS PRADESH. 3.THE ANDHRA PRADESH SOUTHERN POWER DISTRIBUTION CO LTD, (APSPDCL), REP BY ITS CHAIRMAN AND MD, VIDYUT NILAYAM, KESAVAYANA GUNTA, TIRUPATI, ANDHRA PRADESH 4.THE SUPERINTENDENT ENGINEER. APSPDCL, OPERATION CIRCLE, NANDYALA, NANDYALA DISTRICT, ANDHRA PRADESH 5.THE ASSISTANT EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, APSPDCL, BANAGANAPALLE, BANAGANAPALLE VILLAGE AND MANDAL NANDYALA district, ANDHRA PRADESH. gram panchayath, (PANCHAYAT banaganapalle village and mandal ANDHRA PRADESH. 6.THE BANAGANAPALLE EXECUTIVE REP BY ITS SECRETARY) NANDYALA DISTRICT, OFFICER ...RESPONDENT(S): Petition onder Article 226 of the Constitotion of India praying that in the t)lea''"’ri the High Court may be WnroCandarus d Particularly in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the actions of the Respondent No. 6 in issuina possessirn'and deloS propertTof'.h!“er a“ halta'n Tylt'of ReZTaL Urb^D Metropolitan M 9 1 (g) a d 21 oTh “'Article Notic! dited 29 08 2026 '""7 “rtrt consequently set aside the Noiice dated 29.08.2025 issued by the 6th Respondent and pass lA NO: 1 OF 2n7q in the'affirvi^t"; f --“-stances stated the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased Res^n^ d 29.08.2025 issued by the 6th espondent during the pendency of the writ petition and pass lA NO: 2 OF 202/^ Petition under Section 151 CPC in the affidavit filed i praying that in the circumstances stated Pleased to direct T“rpore:tC"4":ndt t^lZ 163 situated in Banaganapalle Village and Mandal, Nandyala District Andhra Pradesh, pending disposal of the Writ Petition and pass " Counsel for the Petitioner: 1.VARUN BYREDDY Counsel for the Respondent(S): 3 1.GP FOR ENERGY 2.GP MUNCIPAL ADMN AND URBAN DEVAP The Court made the following: % 4 THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE VENKATESWARLU NIMMAGADDA WRIT PETITI0N.N0.23279 OF 2025 ORDER:- This writ petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of the India seeking the following reliefs:- "to grant a direction or writ more particularly in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the actions of the Respondent No.6 in issuing the Notices dated 29.08.2025, thereby threatening to interfere with the possession and demolish the property of the Petitioner at having an extent of 561.55 Sq.yards in Sy.No.163 situated in Banaganapalle Village and Mandal, Nandyala District, Andhra Pradesh as illegal, arbitrary, contrary to provisions of the A.P. Panchayat Raj Act, 1994, Andhra Pradesh Metropolitan Region and Urban Development Authorities Act, 2016, and violative of Articles 14, 19(1)(g) and 21 of the Indian Constitution and consequently set aside the Notice dated 29.08.2025 issued by the 6'^ Respondent and pass such other order or orders..." Heard learned counsel for petitioner, learned Government Pleader for 2. Municipal Administration and Urban Development for respondent No.1, learned Government Pleader for Energy for respondent No.2, Sri Venkata Rama Rao, learned Standing Counsel for APSPDCL for respondent Nos. 3 to 5 and Sri M.Sudhir, learned Standing Counsel for Gram Panchayat for respondent No.6. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner herein is the 3. absolute owner and possessor of the property admeasuring to an extent of 561.55 Sq.yds in Sy.No.163 situated in Baganapalle Village and Mandal, Nandyala District, Andhra Pradesh, having acquired the same through registered gift deed dated 17.06.2010 executed by his father. Since then, the petitioner has been in peaceful possession and enjoyment of the subject property. While so, respondent No.6/Gram Panchayat issued show cause notices dated 12.06.2025, 20.06.2025 v: and 27.06.2025 alleging that the petitioner Pursuant to the said notices, 29.08.2025 to the 6"^ respondent. Even authorities neither conducted the road as well the respondent No.6 directing the petitioner to the petitioner submitted his due considering the said explanation, the respondent authorities herein encroached the sewerage line, the petitioner herein submitted his reply on after receipt of the same, the respondent any enquiry nor demarcated the property between as the petitioner. Even though the petitioner replied to the notice, again issued the present impugned notice dated 29.08.2025, remove the alleged encroachment made by him. Then, explanation on 30.08.2025. But, without are trying to evict the petitioner from the subject shop on the ground that the petitioner encroached the sewerage line. Aggrieved by the same, the petitioner filed the present writ petition, submits that in view of the 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner further inclusion of the 6'" respondent-Gram Panchayat within the ambit/ fold of Kurnool Urban Development Authority (KUDA) vide the Gram Panchayat do not empower to G.O.Ms.No.108 dated 23.09.2021, exercise any demolition on the ground of notices said to have been issued by respondenf No.6- Gram Panchayat are without jurisdiction and iiable to be set encroachment. Therefore, the impugned aside. 5. On the other hand, learned Standing Counsel for respondent on record the written instructions dated 01.09.2025 wherein, the relevant portion is extracted hereunder: No.6 placed issued by respondent No.6, "It is submitted that the Banaganapalle Gram Panchayat is widening the roads and constructing safe 6 drainage at 2”'^ ward on Nandyal road of Baganapalle Gram Panchayat. It is submitted that the petitioner unauthorisedly occupied the road with seven shops which are on the drainage and it is very difficult to widening the roads and drainage system. The gram panchayat has issued 3 notices to the said petitioner to vacate the place as per Sections 96 and 98 of Andhra Pradesh Panchayat Raj Act, 1994." Learned Standing Counsel for the respondent No.6 submits that as per 6. Sections 96 and 98 of the Act, 1994 and also as per the G.O.Ms.No.108, dated 23.09.2021, the Gram Panchayat is empowered to remove the encroachment after issuing due notices in respect of properties vested with the Gram Panchayat. He further submits that the subject road itself is under control and management of the Gram Panchayat and proposed for reconstruction of the road as well as drainage. For which, the encroachment of the petitioner is causing inconvenience for proceeding further for extension as well as reconstruction of the drainage. He further submits that even though the petitioner received notices twice, he did not choose to submit any reply/ explanation to the said notices. But before the court, the petitioner is canvassing about the jurisdiction and without conducting any survey and demarcation the petitioner was issued notices. Sections 96 and 98 of the Andhra Pradesh Panchayat Raj Act, 1994 is 7. extracted hereunder: Prohibition against obstruction in or over public roads: -No person shall build any wall or erect any fence or other obstruction or projection or make any encroachment in or over any public road except as hereinafter provided. 96. 1 Removal of encroachments :— (1) The Executive Authority may, by notice, require the owner or occupier of any building to remove or alter any projection, encroachment or obstruction, other than a door, gate, bar or ground floor window, situated against or In front of such building and In or over any public road vested in such Gram Panchayat (2) if the owner or occupier of the building proves that any such projection, encroachment or obstruction has existed for a period sufficient under the law of limitation to give any person a prescriptive title thereto or that it was erected or made with the permission licence of any local authority duly empowered in that behalf, and that the period, if any, for which the permission or licence Is valid has not expired, the Gram Panchayat shall make reasonable compensation to every person who suffers damages by the removal or alteration of the same. 98. or Section 98 prescribes that encroacher of Gram Panchayat property be removed after giving due notice and by paying necessary compensation if required by law - Section 53 postulates that all public roads, sewers, drains, culverts etc., in any village vest In Gram panchayats and It empowers them to encroachments by following procedure prescribed by Panchayat Property Rules made thereunder - There is no stipulation in Section 98 that jurisdiction of civil Court is ousted for eviction of encroachers of Gram Panchayat property - Panchayat Property Rules which provide machinery for eviction of encroachers came into force w.e.f 21-7-2011 - Prior to these Rules, there was no alternative and efficacious machinery for removal of encroachment except to approach civil Court for redressal. remove Public roads are public property, and these roads are constructed for a public purpose - It is only for welfare and betterment of public, that all developmental activities are undertaken - People should be allowed to enjoy benefits of such development - Public roads can be, therefore, used only for travelling needs of public - It > 8 cannot be converted for other collateral purposes [2018 (3)ALD 72 (DB)]. If, in respect of any street, public has a right of way, it is a public street - Public way or public road or public street is a way over which there exists a public right of passage - The vesting of the public street in a local body Is only for the purpose of maintaining it properly as a public street [2018 (3) ALD 72 (DB)]. /As public roads and open spaces, sanctioned lay outs belong to Gram Panchayat under Section 53(1) of Act - And as Commercial Complex Members Welfare Society, gifted all subject layout roads and open spaces in favour of Gram Panchayat, for public use, action of said Society in constructing compound walls and erecting gates over these roads so as to close public access to them or to restrict ingress or egress of general public, is evidently illegal - And amounts to encroachment public roads in layout - And when the same is brought to notice of Gram Panchayat by any person entitled to have access to those roads. It is duty of Gram Panchayat to act and take steps to remove such encroachments [2018 (3) ALD 72 (DB)]. > m > on Roads in village vest in Gram Panchayat, irrespective of whether it is metal road or tar road - It Is duty of Gram Panchayat not to allow anybody to keep something on road which Is causing obstruction to vehicular movement and pedestrians - Therefore, when wood logs are kept by defendant on either side of road and In front of post office, grant of perpetual Injunction by trial Court directing defendant not to keep wood logs on either side of road, cannot be interfered with, more so, when Gram Panchayat gave reasonable opportunity to defendant to remove logs kept on road prior to filing suit - And trial Court has assigned cogent and valid reasons to its findings and first appellate Court has fully endorsed finding recorded by trial Court [2014 (2) ALD 301: 2014 (2) ALT 758) > Power under Sections 53(1) and 98, to remove encroachment and prevent unauthorized use of any road, cannot be exercised unless it Is established that there was encroachment [2015 (6) ALD 277] > Road margin - Occupation of, by sguatters to carry on business with permission of Panchayat, removal of legality - Squatters have no right to continue to occupy margin of panchayat road, especially when the same is causing obstruction for users - 9 Their right to occupy panchayat road margin, even if it is with permission of Panchayat, is subject to right of users of road - Even if their prescriptive right is proved, they are oniy entitied for compensation - Provision of aiternative accommodation, not a condition precedent for ejecting road encroachments [2010 (4) ALD 476: MR 2010 (NOC) 948 (AP)]. Considering the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Standing Counsel for Gram Panchayat for respondent No.6 and on perusal of the material placed on record and in view of the Sections 96 and 98 of the Andhra Pradesh Panchayat Raj Act. 1994, as contended by the learned counsel for the petitioner, the 6*^ respondent-Gram Panchayat falls within the jurisdiction of the KUDA vide G.O.Ms.No.108 dated 23.09.2021. The delegated powers in favour of the KUDA by virtue of G.O.Ms.No.108, cannot render the 6*^ respondent as powerless once it was conferred statutory power under Sections 96 and 98 of the Act. It further observed that having received the notices issued by the Gram Panchayat which is empowered to do so, the petitioner should have been submitted his explanation by substantiating his claim as was submitted in earlier occasion. However, the petitioner submitted explanation to the final show cause notice dated 29.08.2025 which has to be considered by the 6'^ respondent with reference to the provisions as stated above. In view of the reasons stated above, the 6‘^ respondent- Gram Panchayat is directed to consider the explanation dated 30.08.2025 submitted by the petitioner pursuant to the final show cause notice dated 29.08.2025 issued by respondent No.6, with reference to the provisions of the Act as mentioned supra, 8. 9. 10 after providing opportunity of hearing to the petitioner and other stake holders if any. If necessary, the 6‘^ respondent Gram Panchayat shall conduct survey and demarcate the property of the petitioner and the existing road and its margins per the records available and pass a speaking order, in accordance with law. The entire exercise shall be completed within a period of four (04) weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. In the meanwhile, respondent No.6 Gram Panchayat shall maintain status quo in respect of the constructions of the petitioner. Further, the petitioner herein is permitted to make a representation to respondent Nos. 3 to 5 regarding restoration of the power connection. On receipt of such representation, respondent Nos. 3 to 5 shall consider the same with immediate effect pursuant to the orders of this Court. With the above directions, the writ petition is disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs. as 10. Consequently, miscellaneous petitions, pending, if any, shall stand closed. Sd/- N NAGAMMA ASSISTANT REGISTRAR //TRUE COPY// SECTION OFFICER To, 1. The Principal Secretary, Municipal Administration and Urban Development Department, State of Andhra Pradesh, A.P. Secretariat, Velagapudi, Amaravati, Guntur District 2. The Principal Secretary, Department of Energy, State of Andhra Pradesh, Secretariat Buildings, Velagapudi, Guntur District, Andhra Pradesh. 3. The Chairman and MD, Andhra Pradesh Southern Power Distribution Co Ltd, (APSPDCL), Vidyut Nilayam, Kesavayana Gunta, Tirupati, Andhra Pradesh. 4. The Superintendent Engineer, APSPDCL, Operation Circle, Nandyala, Nandyala District, Andhra Pradesh. Assistant Executive Engineer, APSPDCL, Banaganapalle 5. The Banaganapalle Village and Mandal, Nandyala District, Andhra Pradesh 6. The Executive Officer (Panchayat Secretary), Banaganapalle Gram Panchayath, Banaganapalle Village and Mandal, Nandyala District, Andhra Pradesh. 7. One CC to Sri Varun Byreddy, Advocate [OPUC] 8. One CC to Sri M. Sudhir, SC for Gram Panchayat [OPUC] 9. One CC to Sri Venkata Rama Rao, SC for APSPDCL [OPUC] Two CCs to GP for Energy, High Court of Andhra Pradesh [OUT] Two CCs to GP for Municipal Administration & Urban Development, High Court of Andhra Pradesh [OUT] Two CP Copies 10. 11. 12. RAM HIGH COURT DATED:02/09/2025 ORDER WP NO. 23279 OF 2025 18 SEP 2025 j|) ^^NCijn^nt Sectio]^x>^ DISPOSING OF THE WP WITHOUT COSTS