APHC010665472025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3333] WEDNESDAY, THE TENTH DAY OF DECEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE V.SUJATHA WRIT PETITION NO: 34370/2025 Between: 1. S AMANULLA, S/O. BABU, AGED ABOUT 39 YEARS, DOOR NO.7- 76A, P.V.ROAD, SRIKALAHASTI MANDAL, TIRUPATHI DISTRICT, ERSTWHILE CHITTOOR DISTRICT. 2. S. BABU,, S/O. LATE S. KHADHAR SHAHEB, AGED ABOUT 57 YEARS, DOOR NO.7-76A, P.V.ROAD, SRIKALAHASTI MANDAL, TIRUPATHI DISTRICT, ERSTWHILE CHITTOOR DISTRICT. ...PETITIONER(S) AND 1. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, MUNICIPAL ADMINISTRATION AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT, VELAGAPUDI, AMARAVATHI, GUNTUR DISTRICT, ANDHRA PRADESH. 2. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, TIRUPATHI, TIRUPATHI DISTRICT. ERSTWHILE CHITTOOR DISTRICT. 3. THE SRIKALAHASTI MUNICIPALITY, REP.BY ITS COMMISSIONER, SRIKALAHASTI MANDAL, TIRUPATHI DISTRICT,-ERSTWHILE CHITTOOR 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 2 VS,J WP.No.34370 of 2025 of WRIT OF MANDAMUS declaring the action of the Respondent No. 3 issued impugned notice vide Roc.No.2493/G 1/2025, dated 05.12.2025 by giving limitation 72 hours for removal of the Petitioner's house(authorized construction) bearing door No.7-76A, P.V.Road, Srikalahasti without conducting proper survey, without issuing prior notice for hearing and verification of authorized permission given by the Respondent No.3 dated 26.05.2016 and also discriminating the Petitioners house from neighbours who constructed houses in same survey no. 185 is illegal, irregular and unjust and violation of the principles of natural justice and violating the provision of Andhra Pradesh Municipalities Act 1965 and Andhra Pradesh Metropolitan region and Urban Development Authorities Act 2016 and consequently set aside the impugned notice Roc.No.2493/G1/2025, dated 05.12.2025 and direct the Respondent No.3 not demolish the Petitioners house(authorized construction) bearing door No. 7-76A, P.V.Road, Srikalahasti, 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 suspend the impugned notice vide Roc.No.2493/G1/2025, dated 05.12.2025, pending disposal of the main Writ Petition, and pass Counsel for the Petitioner(S): 1. P SARASWATHI Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. P SARASWATHI Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. GP MUNCIPAL ADMN AND URBAN DEV AP The Court made the following: 3 VS,J WP.No.34370 of 2025 ORDER: The present writ petition came to be filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking the following relief: <…declaring the action of the Respondent No. 3 issued impugned notice vide Roc.No.2493/G 1/2025, dated 05.12.2025 by giving limitation 72 hours for removal of the Petitioner's house(authorized construction) bearing door No.7-76A, P.V.Road, Srikalahasti without conducting proper survey, without issuing prior notice for hearing and verification of authorized permission given by the Respondent No.3 dated 26.05.2016 and also discriminating the Petitioners house from neighbours who constructed houses in same survey no. 185 is illegal, irregular and unjust and violation of the principles of natural justice and violating the provision of Andhra Pradesh Municipalities Act 1965 and Andhra Pradesh Metropolitan region and Urban Development Authorities Act 2016 and consequently set aside the impugned notice Roc.No.2493/G1/2025, dated 05.12.2025 and direct the Respondent No.3 not demolish the Petitioners house(authorized construction) bearing door No. 7-76A, P.V.Road, Srikalahasti,….= 2. The petitioners are the absolute owners, enjoyers, possessors of the house building No.7-76A, P.V. Road, Yanadhi colony, revenue ward no.7, Srikalahasti, Tirupati District. Having acquired the same through their ancestors. The case is of the petitioners is that, the Petitioner No.1 gifted the said property to Petitioner No.2 vide document number 37 of 2022 dated 4 VS,J WP.No.34370 of 2025 10.06.2022. Since then, they have been in possession of the said property by paying house tax, water bill and electricity bills etc. 3. It is also the case of the petitioners that in the year 2016, the municipality has already accorded permission to construct the building in the said land and in pursuance of the same the petitioners have constructed building and obtained D.No.7-76A 4. While the things stood thus, the Respondent No.3 here in have issued notice vide ROC. No.2493/G1/2025 dated 05.12.2025, directing the petitioners to remove the unauthorised structure made by encroaching government land which is classified as tank poramboke land, within 72 hours, challenging which the present writ petition is filed. 5. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner as well as Sri Laxmi Narayana Gudipati learned standing counsel for the respondent No.3. 6. On perusal of the encroachment notice dated 05.12.2025, it can be observed that, though it is named as show cause notice, ultimately it is a direction given to the petitioner to remove the unauthorised structure made by encroaching the government land which is classified as Tank poramboke within 72 hours. 7. When the petitioners have constructed a building in the said land after duly obtaining permission on 26.05.2016 from the respondent authorities, the respondents cannot straight away direct the petitioners to vacate from the subject premises without issuing a notice calling for an explanation from the petitioners. Though an eviction notice dated 05.12.2025 is issued, the 5 VS,J WP.No.34370 of 2025 same cannot be called as a notice, as it is a direction given to the petitioners to remove the unauthorised structure without calling for an explanation. 8. In view of the same, there shall be a direction to the petitioners to submit an explanation to the encroachment notice dated 05.12.2025 treating it as show cause notice within a period of two (02) weeks from the date of receipt of the order and on receiving the same, the Respondent No.3 shall consider the explanation after conducting the enquiry by duly affording an opportunity of hearing to the petitioners and pass appropriate orders in accordance with law. Till such time no coercive steps shall be initiated by the respondent no.3 in pursuance to the impugned notice dated 05.12.2025. 9. Accordingly, the Writ Petition is disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs. Consequently, Miscellaneous Petitions, if any, pending shall stand closed. ______________________ JUSTICE V.SUJATHA Date: 10.12.2025 MH/JLSR 209 HONOURABLE SMT. JUSTICE V.SUJATHA Writ Petition No.34370 of 2025 Date: 10.12.2025 MH/JLSR