APHC010005042025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3332] FRIDAY,THE NINETEENTH DAY OF DECEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE RAVI CHEEMALAPATI WRIT PETITION NO: 394/2025 Between: 1. YERRAMSETTY VENKATESWARI, W/O YERRAMSETTY VENKATA RAMANA KUMAR, AGED ABOUT 61 YEARS, R/O. D.NO. 78-4-54/1 STATE BANK COLONY, SYAMALA NAGAR, RAJAMAHENDRAVARAM (URBAN), EAST GODAVARI DISTRICT. ...PETITIONER AND 1. THE STATE OF AP, REP BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, PANCHAYATH RAJ DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIATE, VELAGAPUDI, AMARAVATHI, GUNTUR DISTRICT. 2. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, EAST GODAVARI DISTRICT, RAJAMAHENDRAVARAM, 3. THE TAHSILDHAR, RAJANAGARAM, EAST GODAVARI DISTRICT. 4. GOMPA SIVAKUMAR, S/O LATE GOMPA KONDAL RAO, AGED ABOUT YEARS. DOOR NO 4-7-18/2, KILIM VARI STREET, R. K. RAO PETA, KAKINADA KAKINADA DISTRICT, ANDHRA PRADESH. ...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 any writ or direction or order, more particularly in the nature of writ of mandamus declaring the inaction of 2ND and 3RD Respondents on the representations of Petitioner for removal of obstructions created by the 4TH Respondent between points A and B in FMB and Rough Sketch which is a cart-track punta with a width of 10 ft. running in between the lands of 5th Respondent in Sy.Nos.909 AND 908/5 of Palacharla Village (No.63) and those of the Petitioner and others in Sy.Nos.507/1, 2 (part) of 2 Pidimgoyyi Village (No.66), Rajamahendravaran Mandal, East Godavari District with the help of Police Aid forthwith , 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 No. 2 and 3 to remove the blockades (obstructions) between Sy.Nos.909 & 908/5 of Palacherla Village (No.63), Rajanagaram Mandal, East Godavari District and Sy. No. 507/1,2 of Pidimgoyyi Village (No. 66) of Rajamahendravaram Rural Mandal forthwith with the help of local Police by considering the representation of the petitioner dated 14.08.2023 and 09.11.2023 , pending disposal of the above writ petition and pass Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. PRATHIWADA VARUN KUMAR Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. GP FOR PANCHAYAT RAJ RURAL DEV 2. GP FOR REVENUE 3. M SRI ATCHYUT WRIT PETITION NO: 25523/2020 Between: 1. M JANAKI RAMAIAH, S/O (LATE) RATHAIAH AGE.79,, R/O D.NO. 85- 51-162, MODEL COLONY, NEAR V.L. PURAM, RAJAMAHENDRAVARAM-3, EG DISTRICT. ...PETITIONER AND 1. STATE OF AP, REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY (PANCHAYAT RAJ), PRINCIPAL SECRETARY (PANCHAYAT RAJ), SECRETARIAT, VELAGAPUDI, AMARAVATHI, GUNTUR DISTRICT. 2. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR PANCHAYAT RAJ, KAKINADA, EG DISTRICT. 3. THE TAHSILDAR, RAJANAGARAM MANDAL, EG DISTRICT. 4. DIVANCHERUVU GRAM PANCHAYAT, REP. BY ITS EXECUTIVE OFFICER/SECRETARY, DIVANCHERUVU VILLAGE, RAJANAGARAM 3 MANDAL, EG DISTRICT. 5. GOMPA KONDALA RAO, S/O RANGANAYAKULU, D.NO.4-7-18/2, RAMAKRISHNARAOPETA, KAKINADA, EG DIST. ...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 toto issue any writ or direction or order, more particularly in the nature of writ of mandamus declaring the inaction of 2nd to 4th Respondents on the complaints of the Petitioner and others for removal of obstructions created by 5th Respondent between points A and B in Ex.P4 (Master Plan along with Rough Sketch ) which is a Government cart- track with a width of 10 ft. running in between the lands of the 5th Respondent i.e.in Sy. Nos.909 and 908/5 of Palacharla village (63), Rajanagaram Mandal and that of the Petitioner and others in Sy.No.507/1, 2 (part) of Pidimgoyyi Village (No.66), Rajamahendravaram Rural Mandal, EG District with the help of Police Aid forthwith and pass IA NO: 1 OF 2020 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 2 to 4 and other officers concerned to remove the blockades (obstructions) between Sy.Nos.909 & 908/5 of Palacherla Village (No.63), Rajanagaam Mandal, EG District and Sy. No. 507/1, 2 of Pidimgoyyi Village (No. 66) of Rajamahendravaram Rural Mandal forthwith with the aid of local Police in spite of Memos issued by the District Panchayat Officer, Kakinada pending disposal of the present writ petition, in the interest of justice and pass 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 pleased to grant leave to the petitioner herein /respondent No.4 in WP.No. 25523 of 2020 to file counter affidavit in the above writ petition 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 grant leave to the respondent No.5 to file the counter affidavit in the above Writ Petition and pass IA NO: 2 OF 2025 4 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 bring proposed respondent Mr. Gompa Sri Hari S/o. Gompa Kondala Rao (Died on 22-04- 2021) on record as Respondent No.6 being the legal representative of the deceased 5th Respondent in the above Writ Petition and pass Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. NAGAM CHANDRASEKHAR REDDY Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. Yarraguntla.Koteswara Rao,Standing Counsel For Zilla Praja Parishads,Mandal Praja Parishads and Gra 2. GP FOR PANCHAYAT RAJ RURAL DEV 3. E V V S RAVI KUMAR The Court made the following: 5 COMMONORDER: Non-consideration of the representations made by the petitioners for removal of obstructions made by the unofficial respondents, the present writ petitions are filed. 2. Both the writ petitions are disposed of by way of this common order, in view of the fact that the facts and circumstances of these cases are similar and relate to the same issue. 3. Heard Sri P.Sandeep, learned counsel representing Sri Prathiwada Varun Kumar, learned counsel for the petitioner in W.P.No.394 of 2025 andSri Pramod, learned counsel representing Sri Nagam Chandra Shekar Reddy, learned counsel for the petitionerin W.P.No.25523 of 2020,learned Government Pleader for Panchayat Raj, learned Standing Counsel for Gram Panchayat,Sri K.M.Krishna Reddy, learned Government Pleader for Revenue and Sri M.Sri Achyut, learned counsel for the respondents. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioners contended that despite bringing to the notice of the authorities about the encroachments made on the cart track i.e. subject land, no action has been initiated. They would further contend that in fact pursuant to filing of these writ petitions, survey has been conducted and despite the same, they are not taking steps. It would suffice for the time being, if a direction is given to the respondents concerned to take steps in accordance with law for removing the encroachments. 5. Sri Pramod, learned counsel submitted that subsequent to filing of these writ petitions, survey has been conducted by the surveyor and a 6 report has been sent to the Tahsildar, wherein it was admitted that the encroachments are there. 6. On the other hand, Sri M. Sri Achyut, learned counsel submitted that the petitioners have not impleaded the legal representatives of respondent No.4 and also other similarly situated encroachers as party respondents in the writ petitions. He further contended that there is no encroachment at all as alleged by the petitioners and only to harass the unofficial respondents, such writ petitionsare filed and as such,the writ petitionsare devoid of merits and are liable to be dismissed. 7. On the other hand, Sri K.M.Krishna Reddy, learned Government Pleader for Revenue and also learned Standing Counsel for Gram Panchayat submitted that instead of going into the merits and demerits of these cases, thesewrit petitions can be disposed of, as the authorities have intention to take steps, if any encroachments are made by the unofficial respondents in accordance with law. 8. The contention of Gram Panchayat is that there is no way in between the subject survey numbers, as such question of obstruction did not arise. 9. Perused the record and considered the submissions. 10. Inasmuch as the grievance in the both writ petitions are that certain encroachments took place in the cart track by the unofficial respondents and despite survey has been conducted and identified the encroachments, the same was not removed. 7 11. By virtue of the submissions made by the respective parties, this Court instead of going to the merits and demerits of the cases and to find out whether there are any encroachments or not, is inclined to dispose of the writ petitions by giving directions to the Gram Panchayat as well as the Tahsildar concerned to look into the grievance of the petitioners and to conduct a survey once again to ascertain whether any encroachments are there are not and if so to what extent encroachments are being made. Basing on the report, the Gram Panchayat can take steps in accordance with law. Accordingly, these writ petitions are disposed of by passing the following order:- “The Tahsildar concerned is directed to conduct a survey once again in the subject land after issuing notices to the unofficial respondents as well as to the petitioners. On such notices, the parties shall appear for the survey along with the relevant documents.On such survey, if the Tahsildar finds any encroachments on the subject land, he shall prepare a report mentioning the extent of such encroachments and forward the same to the Gram Panchayat. Upon receipt of such report, the Gram Panchayat shall take steps to remove the encroachments in accordance with law by issuing proper show cause notices to all the encroachersgranting sufficient time to submit their explanations, and to pass a reasoned order after providing an opportunity of being heard. The said exercise shall be completed within a period of three (03) months from the date of receipt of copy of this order. In the survey,if it is found that there are no encroachments, the same shall be communicated in writing to the petitioners by the Tahsildar as well as by the Gram Panchayat.” 8 12. Accordingly, the Writ Petitions are 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: 19.12.2025 SCS 9 246 THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE RAVI CHEEMALAPATI WRIT PETITION Nos.394 of 2025 & 25523 of 2020 Date:- 19.12.2025 SCS