APHC010588302025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH TUESDAY, TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE RAVI CHEEMALAPATI WRIT PETITION NO: 30409/2025 Between: 1. KURMALA RAMAMOHAN GUPTA, S/O K. SANKARADU, AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS, R/O. 40 GUDEM, VIJAYAWADA, KRISHNA DISTRICT, ANDHRA PRADESH 520008 1. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP. BY THE SECRETARY, PANCHAYATRAJ AND RURAL DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT, AMARAVATHI. 2. DISTRICT COLLECTOR, KRISHNA DISTRICT. 3. DISTRICT PANCHAYAT OFFICER, MACHILIPATNAM, KRISHNA DISTRICT. 4. GANNAVARAM GRAM PANCHAYAT, REPRESENTED BY ITS EXECUTIVE AUTHORITY CUM PANCHAYAT SECRETARY. GANNAVARAM MANDAL, KRISHNA DISTRICT. 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 order or writ or direction more particularly one in the nature of writ of mandamus Notice dated 21.10.2025 and trying to demolish the shops without following the due process of law as illegal, arbitrary, and in violation of Articles 14, 21 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) TUESDAY, THE FOURTH DAY OF NOVEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE RAVI CHEEMALAPATI WRIT PETITION NO: 30409/2025 KURMALA RAMAMOHAN GUPTA, S/O K. SANKARADU, AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS, R/O. 40-23/2-7, SRI RAM RESIDENCY, PAKEER GUDEM, VIJAYAWADA, KRISHNA DISTRICT, ANDHRA PRADESH ...PETITIONER AND THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP. BY THE SECRETARY, PANCHAYATRAJ AND RURAL DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT, AMARAVATHI. DISTRICT COLLECTOR, KRISHNA DISTRICT. DISTRICT PANCHAYAT OFFICER, MACHILIPATNAM, KRISHNA GANNAVARAM GRAM PANCHAYAT, REPRESENTED BY ITS XECUTIVE AUTHORITY CUM PANCHAYAT SECRETARY. GANNAVARAM MANDAL, KRISHNA 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 order or writ or direction more particularly one in the nature of writ of mandamus, against the action of 4th respondent in issuing the Notice dated 21.10.2025 and trying to demolish the shops without following the due process of law as illegal, arbitrary, and in violation of Articles 14, 21 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH [3332] THE FOURTH DAY OF NOVEMBER THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE RAVI CHEEMALAPATI KURMALA RAMAMOHAN GUPTA, S/O K. SANKARADU, AGED 7, SRI RAM RESIDENCY, PAKEER GUDEM, VIJAYAWADA, KRISHNA DISTRICT, ANDHRA PRADESH - ...PETITIONER THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP. BY THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, PANCHAYATRAJ AND RURAL DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT PANCHAYAT OFFICER, MACHILIPATNAM, KRISHNA GANNAVARAM GRAM PANCHAYAT, REPRESENTED BY ITS XECUTIVE AUTHORITY CUM PANCHAYAT SECRETARY. ...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 order or writ or direction more particularly one in the , against the action of 4th respondent in issuing the Notice dated 21.10.2025 and trying to demolish the shops without following the due process of law as illegal, arbitrary, and in violation of Articles 14, 21 2 and 300-A of Constitution of India and also in violation of the procedure contemplated in G.O.Ms No. 188 of Panchayat Raj and Rural Development (Pts.lV) Department dated 21-07-2011 and to consequently set aside the notice dated 21.10.2025 issued by the 4th respondent and direct the respondents not to demolish the shops situated in Sy.No. 449/2, to an extent of 32 Sq.Yards in Gannavaram Village, Gannavaram Mandal, Krishna District 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 to direct the respondents not to interfere/demolish the shops belonging to the petitioner situated in 449/2, to an extent of 32 Sq.Yards in Gannavaram Village, Gannavaram Mandal, Krishna District and pass Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. KALAPALA DOONDI MAHARAJ Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. GP FOR PANCHAYAT RAJ RURAL DEV 3 The Court made the following order: Questioning the notice dated 21.10.2025 issued by respondent No.4 under Sections 96 and 98 of the Andhra Pradesh Panchayat Raj Act, 1994, the present Writ Petition has been filed. 2. Heard Sri Kalapala Doondi Maharaj, learned counsel for the petitioner, Ms Chandrika, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Panchayat Raj appearing for respondent Nos.1 to 3 and Sri Y.Koteswara rao, learned standing counsel for Gram Panchayat appearing for respondent No.4. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner, in elaboration to what has been stated in the affidavit, contended that the petitioner is the absolute owner and possessor of the shops situated in R.S.No.449/2, Gannavaram Village, Krishna District, admeasuring 32 sq. yards, and has been regularly paying house tax in respect of the said property. He further submitted that the subject property lies adjacent to a public road, and although the Gram Panchayat recently laid a new road and drainage line, the property continues to remain private land and has not been acquired or notified as public property. He further submitted that, without issuing any notice or following the due process of law, respondent No.4 issued the impugned notice alleging that the petitioner had encroached upon a portion of the road and directed him to remove the structures within 24 hours, failing which the Panchayat would proceed with demolition. Hence, prayed to pass appropriate orders protecting the interest of the petitioner. 4 4. On the other hand, learned counsel for the respondents sought time to get instructions. 5. Perused the impugned notice dated 21.10.2025 and considered the submissions made by learned counsel for the petitioner. 6. The impugned notice does not speak anything about prior issuance of any show cause notice to the petitioner seeking his explanation. Issuing the impugned notice containing such a direction, without issuing any prior show cause notice or affording an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner, is unsustainable under law. 7. The first and foremost principle of natural justice is what is commonly known as ‘audi alteram partem’ rule. It says that no one should be condemned unheard. Notice is the first limb of this principle. It must be precise and unambiguous. It should apprise the party determinatively of the case he has to meet. Time given for the purpose should be adequate so as to enable him to make his representation. In the absence of a notice of the kind and such reasonable opportunity, the order passed becomes wholly vitiated. Thus, it is essential that a party should be put on notice of the case before any adverse order is passed against him. This is one of the most important principles of natural justice. It is after all an approved rule of fair play. 8. This Court observes that in several instances, the authorities, without issuing a show cause notice or affording an opportunity of hearing, have directly issued directions styled as notices. The District Panchayat Officers 5 concerned are directed to examine the reasons for such conduct and ensure that the officials do not issue directions styled as notices without first issuing a show cause notice and affording an opportunity of hearing, in accordance with the principles of natural justice as required under law. 9. Taking the submissions of learned counsel for the petitioner into consideration, this Court finds that the impugned notice is ex-facie illegal and unsustainable, having been issued in clear violation of the principles of natural justice. Hence, the same is liable to be set aside, even without inviting counter. The order would remain the same, even if a counter was filed. 10. Accordingly, the Writ Petition is allowed, setting aside the Notice dated 21.10.2025 issued by respondent No.4. However, this order shall not preclude the respondent authorities concerned from initiating appropriate action against the petitioner in accordance with law, after following due process and affording the petitioner an opportunity of being heard, if so advised. There shall be no order as to costs. Registry is directed to communicate this order to the Commissioner of the Panchayat Raj and Rural Development Department. As a sequel thereto, interlocutory applications pending, if any in the Writ Petition, shall also stand closed. ___________________________ JUSTICE RAVI CHEEMALAPATI 04.11.2025 MP 6 216 THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE RAVI CHEEMALAPATI WRIT PETITION NO.30409 OF 2025 04.11.2025 MP