APHC010630572023 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3333] TUESDAY,THE TWENTY FIFTH DAY OF NOVEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE V.SUJATHA WRIT PETITION NO: 32479/2023 Between: 1. GUMMIDI SUBHASHINI, W/O.NIDHI OCC. EMPLOYEE, AGED 42 YEARS,R/O. 5-56/1, CURRENT OFFICE STREET, PRATAP NAGAR BRIDGE DOWN, GANGANAPALLI GRAMA PANCHAYAT, KAKINADA RURAL MANDAL, KAKINADA DISTRICT. ...PETITIONER AND 1. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP.BY ITS SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, WATER RESOURCES DEPARTMENT, A.P.SECRETARIAT BUILDING, VELAGAPUDI, GUNTUR DISTRICT. 2. EXECUTIVE ENGINEER AND DIST, WATER RESOURCES OFFICER, DRAINAGE DIVISION, KAKINADA, KAKINADA DISTRICT. 3. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, KAKINADA, KAKINADA DISTRICT - 533 004. 4. THE REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER, KAKINADA, KAKINADA DISTRICT - 533 004. 5. THE TAHSILDAR, 0/O.MANDAL REVENUE OFFICER, LALITHANAGAR, KAKINADA RURAL -533 005. KAKINADA DISTRICT. 6. THE GANGANAPALLI GRAM PANCHAYAT, REP.BY ITS PANCHAYAT SECRETARY PANCHAYAT OFFICE, GANGANAPALLI VILLAGE, KAKINADA RURAL, KAKINADA -2- W.P. No.32479 OF 2023 DISTRICT. 7. THE MUNICIPAL COMMISSIONER, KAKINADA MUNICIPAL CORPORATION, KAKINADA 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 a Writ , order, or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of Respondent No. 2 in issue show cause notice dated 22-07-2023 to Petitioner directed to remove encroachments in survey No.l34(P) of Ganganapalli village Kakinada Rural Mandal, Kakinada District is bad , arbitrary, illegal, un constitutional, clear violation of Article 14, 21 and 300-A of Constitution of India, and contrary to Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Re-settlement Act,'2013 and Section 98(2) of the A.P. panchayat raj Act 1994, section 3(1 )(G) of SC,ST (POA) Act 1989 and set-aside the Notice dated 22-07-2023 and consequently direct the Respondents No. 2 to 7 not to interfere in to peaceful possession and enjoyment of Petitioner Residential House bearing No. 5- 56/1, current office street, Pratap Nagar Bridge down, Ganganapalli Grama Panchayat, Kakinada Rural Mandal, Kakinada District and pass such IA NO: 1 OF 2023 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 direct the Respondents No. 2 to 7 to follow Right to Fair Compensation and Transpareney in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Re-settlement Act, 2013 if needed this residential house premises bearing door Number 5-56/1, current office street, Pratap Nagar Bridge down, Ganganapalli Grama Panchayat, Kakinada Rural Mandal, Kakinada District for public purpose pending disposal of main writ petition and pass such IA NO: 1 OF 2024 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 vacate the interim order passed in WP No. 32479 of 2023 dated 20-12-2023, and dismiss the writ Petition in the interest of Justice and pass Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. DEVAKUMAR SALIKITI -3- W.P. No.32479 OF 2023 Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. Yarraguntla.Koteswara Rao,Standing Counsel For Zilla Praja Parishads,Mandal Praja Parishads and Gra 2. GP FOR IRRI AND CAD (AP) The Court made the following: -4- W.P. No.32479 OF 2023 THE HON’BLE SMT.JUSTICE V.SUJATHA WRIT PETITION NO: 32479 OF 2023 ORDER: 1. The Writ Petition is filed for the following relief: <...to issue a Writ , order, or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of Respondent No. 2 in issue show cause notice dated 22-07- 2023 to Petitioner directed to remove encroachments in survey No.l34(P) of Ganganapalli village Kakinada Rural Mandal, Kakinada District is bad , arbitrary, illegal, un constitutional, clear violation of Article 14, 21 and 300-A of Constitution of India, and contrary to Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Re-settlement Act,'2013 and Section 98(2) of the A.P. Panchayat Raj Act 1994, section 3(1) (G) of SC,ST (POA) Act 1989 and set-aside the Notice dated 22- 07-2023 and consequently direct the Respondents No. 2 to 7 not to interfere in to peaceful possession and enjoyment of Petitioner Residential House bearing No. 5-56/1, current office street, Pratap Nagar Bridge down, Ganganapalli Grama Panchayat, Kakinada Rural Mandal, Kakinada District, and pass such other order...= 2. The case of the Petitioner is that she has been in possession of the subject land based on the possession certificate issued by the Mandal Revenue Officer in the year 1994. She constructed a house on the said land, obtained an electricity connection, and has been paying house tax for Door No. 5-29, near Pratap Nagar Bridge, Kakinada. 3. While the things stood thus, the 2nd Respondent issued the impugned show cause notice, dated 22.07.2023, alleging that the petitioner had encroached the PWD drainage canal poramboke near -5- W.P. No.32479 OF 2023 Sy.No.134(P) of Gaganapalli Village of Kakinada Rural Mandal. It was stated in the notice that, during a local inspection conducted on 06.04.2023 by the District Water Resources Officer and Executive Engineer, Drains Division, Kakinada, along with officials from the Roads and Buildings (R&B) Department, Kakinada Rural Mandal, and the Panchayat Secretary of Ganganpally Village, it was observed that the Mandal Revenue Officers issued possession pattas in the year 1994 without prior permission/ information or NOC from the Irrigation Department. The lands of Canals, Drains, Nalas, Tanks, Lakes, Reservoirs or any water bodies are not entitled to issue pattas, Houses, any constructions, NOC’s/ permissions, alienation of lands to any other purposes as proposed by any department as per the direction of the Hon’ble Supreme Court and G.Os., issued by the State Government from time to time. Hence, it is prohibited to issue permissions or pattas of PWD (Drainage water bodies) land in Survey No. 134 (P). Consequently, the petitioner was directed to submit an explanation within 30 days as to why legal action should not be taken and why the alleged encroachments should not be removed as per law and judicial precedents. Aggrieved by the said show cause notice, the petitioner filed the present writ petition. 4. When the writ petition came up for admission on 20.12.2023, this Court granted an interim order, directing that status quo with -6- W.P. No.32479 OF 2023 respect to the subject property be maintained in all respects until further orders. 5. The 2nd Respondent filed a detailed counter affidavit, inter alia stating that the petitioner filed an affidavit in the name of Gummidi Subhashini, claiming to be an employee, but her surname is Dadala Subhashini, and she is the wife of Gummidi Nidhi, a Government employee. The petitioner is not entitled for the said land, as she is a Senior Accountant at Peddapuram Municipality (deputation from Yeleswaram Municipality). It is further stated that the Revenue Department, Kakinada Rural, had not obtained permission or consent from the Irrigation Department to issue any possession certificates in respect of the PWD drainage land in Survey No.134(P). This fact is also reflected in Condition No.2 of the Land Possession Certificate (Telugu version). It is further stated that compensation had been paid in the year 2016 under the R&R Package by the Revenue Department, Kakinada RDO, and that the Petitioner, having constructed her house only in 2019 without obtaining requisite permissions from the PWD, Panchayat, or Revenue authorities, was not entitled for any rights over the land. It is also asserted in the counter that no possession certificates were ever issued by the Revenue Department in respect of PWD drainage land in Survey No.134(P), as per the information provided under the RTI Act. -7- W.P. No.32479 OF 2023 6. Heard the learned counsel for the Petitioner, and the learned Assistant Government Pleader for Water Resources Department appearing for Respondents 1 and 2 and the learned Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue, appearing Respondents 3 to 5. 7. As per the counter affidavit filed by the 2nd Respondent, it appears that on a local inspection it has been identified that the Mandal Revenue Officer has issued possession certificates in favour of various persons including the petitioner without obtaining prior permission from the irrigation Department and because of which the impugned show cause notice was issued to the petitioner on 22.07.2023. However, it is an admitted fact that the petitioner has been in possession of the subject land since 1994 pursuant to a possession certificate issued by the Revenue Department and that she constructed a house after obtaining necessary from the Municipal authorities and the Electricity authorities. Therefore, as long as the possession certificates issued by the Revenue Department are in subsistence, the Irrigation Department cannot issue the present notice directing the petitioner to evict from the subject land. Even otherwise, if at all the petitioner has really encroached the subject land, the Irrigation department has no jurisdiction to issue the impugned show cause notice as only the revenue authorities have power to issue such notices for eviction. -8- W.P. No.32479 OF 2023 8. In view of the above, the writ petition is allowed. The impugned show cause notice dated 22.07.2023 is set aside. The Respondents are directed not to interfere with the possession of the petitioner over the subject land without following due process of law. No costs. 9. Miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending in this Writ Petition shall stand closed. ___________________ JUSTICE V.SUJATHA Dt.25.11.2025 BV