Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Andhra Pradesh · body

2025 DAILYLAW 41242 (AP)

MALLELA VENKATESWARLU v. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH

WP/16111/2025 · 2025-12-03

Ravi Cheemalapati

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

1 APHC010317122025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3332] THURSDAY, THE FOURTH DAY OF DECEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE RAVI CHEEMALAPATI WRIT PETITION NO: 16111/2025 Between: 1. MALLELA VENKATESWARLU, S/O M. SUBBARAO, AGED ABOUT 39 YEARS, CULTIVATION, R/O KELLAMPALLI VILLAGE AND POST, MARRIPUDI MANDAL, PRAKASAM DISTRICT. ...PETITIONER AND 1. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP.BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, PANCHAYAT RAJ AND RURAL DEVELOPMENT VELAGAPUDI, SECRETARIAT, AMARAVATHI. 2. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR AT ONGOLE, PRAKASAM DISTRICT. 3. THE DISTRICT PANCHAYAT OFFICER, AT ONGOLE PRAKASAM DISTRICT. 4. THE MANDAL PARISHAD DEVELOPMENT OFFICER, MARRIPUDI MANDAL, MARRIPUDI, PRAKASAM DISTRICT. 5. THE EXTENSION OFFICER, MANDAL PARISHAND DEVELOPMENT OFFICE, MARRIPUDI, MARRIPUDI MANDAL, PRAKASAM DISTRICT. 6. THE TAHSILDAR, MARRIPUDI, MARRIPUDI MANDAL PRAKASAM DISTRICT. 7. THE MANDAL SURVEYOR, MARRIPUDI, MARRIPUDI MANDAL, PRAKASAM DISTRICT 2 8. KELLAMPALLI GRAMAPANCHAYAT, REP. BY ITS PANCHAYAT SECRETARY, KELLAMPALLI VILLAGE, MARRIPUDI MANDAL, PRAKASAM DISTRICT. 9. GUNTURI SUBBARAO, S/O G.MUSALAIAH, R/O KELLAMPALLI VILLAGE AND POST, AGED ABOUT 52 YEARS, CULTIVATION, MARRIPUDI MANDAL, PRAKASAM DISTRICT. 10. GUNTURI VENKATESWARLU, S/O.G. MUSALAIAH AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS CULTIVATION R/O. KELLAMPALLI VILLAGE AND POST MARRIPUDI MANDAL, PRAKASAM DISTRICT. 11. GUNTURI VENKATARAO, S/O.G. MUSALAIAH, AGED ABOUT 48 YEARS, CULTIVATION, R/O. KELLAMPALLI VILLAGE AND POST, MARRIPUDI MANDAL, PRAKASAM DISTRICT. 12. BIRUPUNENI SUBBAIAH, S/O B.CHINNA SUBBAIAH, AGED ABOUT 57 YEARS, CULTIVATION, R/O KELLAMPALLI VILLAGE AND POST, MARRIPUDI MANDAL, PRAKASAM DISTRICT. 13. MUPPARAJU VENKATESWARLU, S/O MUPPARAJU CHINNA VENKATESWARLU, AGED ABOUT 70 YEARS, CULTIVATION, R/O KELLAMPUDI VILALGE AND POST, MARRIPUDI MANDAL, PRAKASAM 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 to issue an appropriate Writ, Order or Direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the inaction of the respondents more particularly respondent Nos.6 and 8 in taking immediate action to remove the encroachment including wall constructed by respondent Nos.9 to 13 with cement bricks across the Panchayat road situated in R.S.No.335/1 at Kellampalli Village Marripudi Mandal Prakasam district and to take appropriate action against the encroachers i.e. respondent Nos.9 to 13 as illegal, arbitrary, unjust and violative of Articles of 14 and 21 of the Constitution of India and consequently direct the respondents to take immediate action to remove encroachment including wall constructed by respondent Nos.9 to 13 with cement bricks across the Panchayat road in the interest of justice. 3 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 to direct the respondents to take immediate action to remove encroachment including wall constructed by respondent Nos.9 to 13 with cement bricks across the Panchayat road situated in R.S.No.335/1 at Kellampalli Village, Marripudi Mandal, Prakasam District and to take appropriate action against the encroachers i.e. respondent Nos.9 to 13 pending disposal of the writ petition in the interest of justice. Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. NUVVULA RAM BABU Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. GP FOR PANCHAYAT RAJ RURAL DEV 2. Mattegunta Sudhir, Standing Counsel for Z.P.Ps, M.P.Ps, Gram Panchayats 3. K NARSI REDDY The Court made the following: 4 ORDER: To declare the action of respondent Nos.6 and 8 in not taking immediate action to remove encroachment including wall constructed by respondent Nos.9 to 13 with cement bricks across the Panchayat road situated in R.S.No.335/1 at Kellampalli Village, Marripudi Mandal, Prakasam District and to take appropriate action against the encroachers i.e., respondent Nos.9 to 13 as illegal, arbitrary, unjust and violative of Articles of 14 and 21 of the Constitution of India and consequently, to direct the respondents to take immediate action to remove encroachment including wall constructed by respondent Nos.9 to 13 with cement bricks across the Panchayat road, the present writ petition is filed. 2. Heard Sri N. Ram Babu, learned counsel for the petitioner, learned Government Pleader for Panchayat Raj and Sri M. Sudheer, learned Standing Counsel for Gram Panchayat. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner, while reiterating the contents of the affidavit, contended that there are encroachments on the public road and the respondent authorities could take steps to remove encroachments in accordance with law. 4. On the other hand, learned Assistant Government Pleader appearing for the respondents submitted that in fact, there are no encroachments on the public road as alleged by the petitioner. However, the respondent authorities 5 would take appropriate steps in accordance with law, if any encroachment is made on the public road. 5. Taking the submissions of the learned Assistant Government Pleader into consideration, this Court is inclined to dispose of the writ petition by passing the following order: “The respondent authorities concerned are directed to take steps to remove the encroachments, if any made on the public road as alleged by the petitioner, in accordance with law, by giving proper show cause notice inviting explanation by giving sufficient time to all the encroachers and also by providing an opportunity of being heard and pass a reasoned order accordingly. Such exercise shall be completed within a period of three (03) months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.” 6. Accordingly, the Writ Petition is disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs. As a sequel, miscellaneous applications, pending if any, shall stand closed. _____________________ RAVI CHEEMALAPATI, J Date: 4th December, 2025 KSN/RMR 6 273 THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE RAVI CHEEMALAPATI WRIT PETITION NO: 16111 of 2025 Dated: 04.12.2025 KSN/RMR