APHC010477702025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3329] WEDNESDAY,THE TENTH DAY OF SEPTEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE VENKATESWARLU NIMMAGADDA WRIT PETITION NO: 24240/2025 Between: 1. BURUGUPALLI SUBBA RAO, S/O.CHINNA RAO, AGED ABOUT 51 YEARS, R/O.UNDRAJAVARAM, UNDRAJAVARAM MANDAL, EAST GODAVARI DISTRICT. ...PETITIONER AND 1. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP. ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, PANCHAYAT RAJ DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT, VELAGAPUDI, AMARAVATI. 2. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR PANCHAYAT WING, EAST GODAVARI DISTRICT, AT RAJAMAHENDRAVARAM. 3. PALANGI GRAM PANCHAYAT, REP. BY ITS PANCHAYAT SECRETARY, PALANGI VILLAGE, UNDRAJAVARAM MANDAL, EAST GODAVARI DISTRICT. ...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 a Writ or Order or Direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the Notice vide Roc.No.32/2025, dated 03-09-2025 issued by the Respondent No.3 whereby directed the Petitioner to remove the alleged encroachment within 7 days, (served on the Petitioner on 8-9-2025) without issuing any prior show cause 2 notice, as arbitrary, illegal, violation of principles of natural justice, unconstitutional, colourable exercise of power, contrary to the provisions of A.P.Panchayat Raj Act, 1964 and rules made thereunder, and to pass such IA NO: 1 OF 2025 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 may be pleased to grant stay of all further proceedings pursuant to Notice vide Roc.No.32/2025, dated 03-9-2025 issued by the Respondent No.3, pending disposal of the above writ petition, and to pass such Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. BOLLA VENKATA RAMA RAO Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. GP FOR PANCHAYAT RAJ RURAL DEV The Court made the following: 3 THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE VENKATESWARLU NIMMAGADDA WRIT PETITION NO: 24240/2025 ORDER: This writ petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of the India seeking the following reliefs:- “to issue a writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the Notice vide Roc.No.32/2025, dated 03.09.2025 issued by the respondent No.3 whereby directed the petitioner to remove the alleged encroachment within 7 days, (served on the petitioner on 08.09.2025) without issuing any prior show cause notice, as arbitrary, illegal, violation of principles of natural justice, unconstitutional, colourable exercise of power, contrary to the provisions of A.P. Panchayat Raj Act, 1964 and rules made thereunder and pass such other order.” 2. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned Government Pleader for respondent Nos.1 and 2 and the learned Standing Counsel for respondent No.3. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is the absolute owner and possessor of the land admeasuring to an extent of Ac.0.33 cents in Sy.No.88/8, Undrajavaram Village and Mandal, East Godavari District, having acquired the same through a registered Will dated 07.12.1993 duly executed by his grandmother. After the death of his grandmother, he has been in possession and enjoyment of the subject property. At the said property the petitioner has set up a petrol filling station with the approval of the concerned authority in the year 2007. Since then, 4 he has been running the petrol retail filling station without there being any interference or hindrance from any parties. He further submits that abutting to the petitioner’s property there is an abandoned road which fells within the jurisdiction of the 3rd respondent/Gram Panchayat, adjacent to that the petitioner set up weighbridge and constructed compound wall. The respondents are alleging that the petitioner has encroached the abandoned road and got constructed part of the weighbridge and filling station at encroached land. He further submits that even assuming that the petitioner has encroached the subject land, the petitioner being a possessor is entitled prior notice and there should be a specific survey and demarcation to determine that what extent and what part of the land was occupied/encroached by the petitioner. But, without observing the same and conducting the alleged enquiry as stated in the notice behind the back of the petitioner and directing the petitioner to evict the encroached portion as mentioned in the notice, without prior notice is contrary to the principles of natural justice and without due process. As such the impugned notice is liable to be set aside. 4. On the other hand, learned Standing Counsel for respondent No.3/Gram Panchayat submits that after having due survey and demarcation and after conducting physical verification pursuant to the survey report, the revenue authorities as well as R & B department authorities came to a conclusion that the petitioner had 5 encroached an extent of Ac.0.015 cents in Sy.No.54 and Ac.0.07 cents in Sy.No.55 and got constructed filling station as well as weighbridge and causing inconvenience to the public. Hence, the respondent authority directed for eviction of the petitioner from subject encroached land. He further submits that even though the impugned notice is named as notice, but it is in the form of order. As such, let there be a direction to the petitioner to treat the impunged notice as show-cause notice and submit his explanation. After such explanation the respondents will pass a speaking order and proceed further in accordance with law. 5. Considering the submissions made by both the learned counsel and on perusal of the material placed on record particularly the impugned notice, it appears that even though the impugned notice is named as notice, but it is in the form of an order directing the petitioner to evict from the subject land as mentioned in the notice without any prior notice and without observing due process. Therefore, as contended by the learned Standing Counsel, the petitioner will treat the impugned notice dated 03.09.2025 as a show- cause notice and submit his explanation along with all the documents and permissions as possessed by him to substantiate his claim over the subject property. 6. In view of the reasons as stated above, the petitioner is hereby directed to submit explanation along with all the documents 6 to substantiate his claim over the subject property and claim for his land which was taken over for laying of the R & B road and make separate request for compensation or damages or for exchange of land as entitled by the petitioner, within a period of two(2) weeks from the date of receipt of copy of this Order. After receipt of the said explanation submitted by the petitioner, the 3rd respondent shall consider the same, if necessary after having survey and demarcation in the presence of the petitioner with the help of Mandal Surveyor and dispose of the explanation of the petitioner after providing opportunity of hearing to the petitioner, within a period of two(2) months thereafter. Till then, the respondents are directed not to interfere with the possession and enjoyment of the property of the petitioner. 7. Accordingly, the Writ Petition is disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs. As a sequel miscellaneous application, pending, if any, shall also stand closed. ________________________________ VENKATESWARLU NIMMAGADDA, J 10.09.2025 TTPPSS 7 264 HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE VENKATESWARLU NIMMAGADDA WRIT PETITION NO: 24240/2025 10.09.2025 TTPPSS