APHC010635672025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3332] WEDNESDAY,THE TENTH DAY OF DECEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE RAVI CHEEMALAPATI WRIT PETITION NO: 32876/2025 Between: 1. PORIPIREDDY HYMAVATHI, W/O P RAMESWARA RAO, AGED ABOUT 68 YEARS, R/O D.NO.5-113, MAIN ROAD, BADAMPUDI VILLAGE, UNGUTURUMANDAL, ELURU DISTRICT. ...PETITIONER AND 1. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REPRESENTED BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, PANCHAYAT RAJ AND RURAL DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT, VELAGAPUDI, GUNTUR DISTRICT. 2. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, ELURU GODAVARI, ELURU. 3. THE TAHSILDAR, UNGUTURU MANDAL ELURU DISTRICT. 4. THE MANDAL PARISHAD DEVELOPMENT OFFICER, UNGUTURU MANDAL, ELURU DISTRICT. 5. THE BADAMPUDI GRAM PANCHAYAT, REPRESENTED BY PANCHAYAT SECRETARY, BADAMPUDI VILLAGE, 2 UNGUTURU MANDAL, ELURU 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 topleased to issue a Writ, order or direction, especially one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus, declaring the action of the Respondents particularly the 5th Respondent in trying to demolish petitioner house and pan shop bearing old D.No.5-113 (New D.No.4-107), Main road, Badampudi Village, Unguturu Mandal, Eluru District, without passing any orders, in pursuant to petitioner explanation dt.14- 11-2025 submitted for the notice, dt.07-11-2025, issued by the 5th Respondent, is illegal, arbitrary, violative of Principles of Natural Justice, contrary to the provisions of A.P Panchayat Raj Act, 1994 and Rules made their under and Articles 14, 21 and 300-A of the Constitution of India and consequently desist the Respondents and their staff from interfering with petitioner possession and enjoyment of petitioner house and pan shop stated supra, and pass 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 pleased to direct the Respondents and their staff not to interfere with petitioner possession and enjoyment of house and pan shop and house bearing old D.No.5-113 (New D.No.4-107), Main road, Badampudi Village, Unguturu Mandal, Eluru District, pending disposal of the above Writ Petition and pass Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. T V JAGGI REDDY Counsel for the Respondent(S): 3 1. GP FOR PANCHAYAT RAJ RURAL DEV The Court made the following Order: To declare the action of the respondent authorities in trying to demolish the petitioner’s house and pan shop, bearing D.No.4- 107 (old D.No.5-113), situated on Main Road, Badampudi Village, Unguturu Mandal, Eluru District, without passing orders on the petitioner’s explanation submitted in response to the notice dated 07.11.2025, as illegal and arbitrary, the present writ petition is filed. 2. Heard Sri T.V. Jaggi Reddy, learned counsel for the petitioner, Sri Y. Koteswara Rao, learned Standing Counsel for the Gram Panchayat and Ms. Naga Chandrika, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner, while reiterating the contents of the affidavit, submitted that a show-cause notice dated 07.11.2025 was issued by the Gram Panchayat, to which the petitioner submitted his explanation. Pursuant thereto, no enquiry was conducted but the respondent Gram Panchayat straightway tried to interfere with the petitioner’s property. If such highhanded action is allowed to continue, it would not only affect 4 the rights of the petitioner but also adversely affect his livelihood. As such, prayed to pass appropriate orders protecting the interest of the petitioner. 4. Learned Standing counsel, on instructions, submitted that the explanation submitted by the petitioner is very much received by the Gram Panchayat and is under consideration and that they have an intention to pass appropriate orders in accordance with the law. As such, prayed to close the writ petition. 5. The main grievance of the petitioner is that pending consideration of his explanation submitted in response to the notice dated 07.11.2025, the respondent authorities, without following due process of law, tried to demolish his house and pan shop. The contention of the learned Standing Counsel is that the Gram Panchayt has an intention to consider the compliant of the petitioner and would pass appropriate orders thereon in accordance with law. 6. As there is no dispute with regard to the submission of explanation by the petitioner to the show cause notice issued by the Gram Panchayat and as the authorities have an intention to consider the same, there is no purpose in keeping the writ 5 petition pending and this Court is inclined to dispose of the writ petition by passing the following order: <The respondent authorities are directed to consider the explanation submitted by the petitioner in response to the notice dated 07.11.2025 and pass appropriate orders thereon in accordance with law, after affording an opportunity of being heard, as expeditiously as possible. Till such orders are passed, no coercive steps shall be taken with respect to the petitioner's property.= 7. 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. ____________________________ JUSTICE RAVI CHEEMALAPATI Date: 10.12.2025 ANS 6 292 THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE RAVI CHEEMALAPATI WRIT PETITION NO: 32876/2025 Date: 10.12.2025 ANS