APHC010604472025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3332] TUESDAY,THE TWENTY FIFTH DAY OF NOVEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE RAVI CHEEMALAPATI WRIT PETITION NO: 31179/2025 Between: Godavarthi Ashok Varma ...PETITIONER AND The State Of Andhra Pradesh and Others ...RESPONDENT(S) Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. C SUBODH Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. GP FOR PANCHAYAT RAJ RURAL DEV 2. Yarraguntla.Koteswara Rao,Standing Counsel For Zilla Praja Parishads,Mandal Praja Parishads and Gra The Court made the following order: Impugning the proceedings issued by the 3rd respondent dated 04.11.2025, the present writ petition is filed. 2. Heard Sri C.Subodh, learned counsel for the petitioner, Sri Y.Koteswara Rao, learned standing counsel for Gram Panchayat and Smt Naga Chandrika, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Panchayat Raj. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner in elaboration to what has been stated in the affidavit contended that, on the alleged ground of encroachment, the 3rd respondent had issued a show cause notice to the petitioner , to which he had submitted his explanation dated 22.10.2025 but without considering the said explanation in a right perspective, the 3rd respondent had issued the impugned proceedings dated 05.11.2025 stating that the illegal constructions will be removed by the Gram Panchayat on 10.11.2025 by virtue of G.O.Ms.No.188 dated 21.07.2011. He further submitted that in violation to Rule 4(i) of the said G.O. no opportunity of personal hearing was given to the petitioner before issuing the impugned proceedings for eviction. Even otherwise, the impugned order is cryptic and if the same is allowed to subsist, the rights of the petitioner would be affected. As such prayed to pass appropriate orders in that regard. In support of his contentions, learned counsel for the petitioner relied on the judgment passed by this Court in W.P.No.6310 of 2020 wherein eviction notice was set aside and directed the authorities to afford personal hearing to the petitioner therein and pass orders in accordance with law. 4. On the other hand, while justifying the orders of the Gram Panchayat, learned Standing counsel contended that there is neither illegality nor procedural irregularity in issuing the impugned proceedings, inviting explanation itself amounts to following the principles of natural justice. Further, the petitioner is an encroacher of the land classified as 8tank9. He further submitted that the Apex Court in catena of cases has directed that state has to protect all the tanks and restore to its originality. Hence, the petitioner has not made out any valid grounds warranting the interference of this court and the writ petition is devoid of merits and liable to be dismissed. 5. Perused the record and considered the submissions of both the learned counsel. 6. Rule 4 of G.O.Ms.No.188 dated 21.07.2011 relates to eviction of encroachments: “4. EVICTION OF ENCROACHMENTS: (i) Where it is brought to the notice that any property of the Panchayat is under occupation of any persons the Executive authority (Panchayat Secretary) shall serve a notice to the party concerned and give a brief hearing before proceeding for eviction. (ii) Suitable orders shall be passed by the Executive authority (Panchayat Secretary) before actual eviction takes place. (iii) The Divisional Panchayat Officer will conduct a monthly review of these cases for protecting Gram Panchayat properties in his jurisdiction through monitoring the process of eviction. He will also give periodical reports to District Panchayat Officer, who will review the cases once in two months. (iv) The Executive authority (Panchayat Secretary) may take necessary assistance from the police as per section 139 of the Andhra Pradesh Panchayat Raj Act’1994. (v) The evicted property of the Gram Panchayat shall be protected by makingfencing or by constructing a compound wall depending on the value of theproperty and by displaying a notice board. (vi) A permanent register on encroachment of Panchayat properties shall be maintained in all Gram Panchayats and the same will be validated in the Gram Sabha and Gram Panchayat meetings at least twice in a year. (vii) Aggrieved parties may file representations to the Executive authority (Panchayat Secretary) concerned by marking a copy to the Divisional Panchayat Officer. (viii) The petitions filed by the aggrieved parties will be monitored and disposed of by the Divisional Panchayat Officer / District Panchayat Officer.” 7. In view of the above provision, the petitioner has to be given a brief hearing before proceeding for eviction and thereafter the respondents have to issue the eviction order. Unfortunately, in the present case, the authorities have not provided the opportunity of hearing to the petitioner before issuing the impugned eviction notice, contrary to the said provision and in violation of principles of natural justice. Therefore, the order impugned is wholly unsustainable, ex-facie illegal and liable to be set aside and the matter has to be remitted back to the Gram Panchayat concerned for adjudication afresh by providing the opportunity of personal hearing. Moreover, the judgment relied by the learned counsel for the petitioner is applicable to the facts of this case and as such, this Court is inclined to dispose of the writ petition without inviting counter, with the following directions: i. The impugned proceedings dated 04.11.2025 and 05.11.2025 are hereby set aside and the matter is remitted back to the Gram Panchayat concerned. ii. The Gram Panchayat concerned shall provide an opportunity of personal hearing to the petitioner by issuing a notice fixing reasonable time & date. iii. On receipt of the said notice, the petitioner shall appear before the respondent authorities and submit his arguments and thereupon the respondents shall pass orders in accordance with the rules in vogue. iv. Till such exercise, the respondents are directed not to take any coercive steps against the petitioner. With the above directions, the writ petition is disposed of. No costs. Miscellaneous applications, pending if any, shall stand closed. ___________________________ JUSTICE RAVI CHEEMALAPATI BRS