APHC010692412025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH MONDAY, THE TWENTY SECOND DAY OF DECEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE RAVI CHEEMALAPATI WRIT PETITION NO: Between: 1. NANEPALLI CHIRANJEEVI,, S/O. N. APPLANAIDU, AGED ABOUT 51 YEARS, R/O. D.NO.57, KAPU STREET, KONDAKERLA, ATCHUTHAPURAM MANDAL, ANAKAPALLI DISTRICT, ANDHRA PRADESH - 531033. 1. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, SECRETARY, PANCHAYAT RAJ DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT BUILDINGS, VELAGAPUDI, GUNTUR DISTRICT, ANDHRA PRADESH - 522238. 2. THE DISTRICT PANCHAYAT OFFICER, ANAKAPALLI DISTRICT, ANDHRA PRADESH 3. THE MANDAL PARISHAD DEVELOPMENT ATCHUTHAPURAM MANDAL, ANAKAPALLI DISTRICT, ANDHRA PRADESH -531033. 4. THE KONDAKERLA GRAM PANCHAYAT, REP. BY ITS PANCHAYAT SECRETARY, ATCHUTHAPURAM MANDAL, ANAKAPALLI DISTRICT, ANDHRA PRADESH 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, direction or writ, more particularly one in the nature IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) MONDAY, THE TWENTY SECOND DAY OF DECEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE RAVI CHEEMALAPATI WRIT PETITION NO: 35489/2025 NANEPALLI CHIRANJEEVI,, S/O. N. APPLANAIDU, AGED ABOUT 51 YEARS, R/O. D.NO.57, KAPU STREET, KONDAKERLA, ATCHUTHAPURAM MANDAL, ANAKAPALLI DISTRICT, ANDHRA 531033. ...PETITIONER AND THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, PANCHAYAT RAJ DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT BUILDINGS, VELAGAPUDI, GUNTUR DISTRICT, ANDHRA 522238. THE DISTRICT PANCHAYAT OFFICER, ANAKAPALLI DISTRICT, ANDHRA PRADESH -531033. THE MANDAL PARISHAD DEVELOPMENT ATCHUTHAPURAM MANDAL, ANAKAPALLI DISTRICT, ANDHRA 531033. THE KONDAKERLA GRAM PANCHAYAT, REP. BY ITS PANCHAYAT SECRETARY, ATCHUTHAPURAM MANDAL, ANAKAPALLI DISTRICT, ANDHRA PRADESH - 531033. ...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, direction or writ, more particularly one in the nature IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH [3332] MONDAY, THE TWENTY SECOND DAY OF DECEMBER THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE RAVI CHEEMALAPATI NANEPALLI CHIRANJEEVI,, S/O. N. APPLANAIDU, AGED ABOUT 51 YEARS, R/O. D.NO.57, KAPU STREET, KONDAKERLA, ATCHUTHAPURAM MANDAL, ANAKAPALLI DISTRICT, ANDHRA ...PETITIONER REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, PANCHAYAT RAJ DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT BUILDINGS, VELAGAPUDI, GUNTUR DISTRICT, ANDHRA THE DISTRICT PANCHAYAT OFFICER, ANAKAPALLI DISTRICT, OFFICER, ATCHUTHAPURAM MANDAL, ANAKAPALLI DISTRICT, ANDHRA THE KONDAKERLA GRAM PANCHAYAT, REP. BY ITS PANCHAYAT SECRETARY, ATCHUTHAPURAM MANDAL, ANAKAPALLI ...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, direction or writ, more particularly one in the nature 2 of writ of Mandamus, declaring the action of 4th respondent in not receiving application made for building permission and in issuing eviction notice through Proceedings Rc.No. 2 of 2025 dated 22.11.2025, directing me to stop the work and removal of minor construction in the D.No.16-6, in an extent of 65 Sq.yards in Sy.No.96/A of Kondakeria. Atchuthapuram Mandal, Anakapalli District, even though the construction is made on private land and not creating any hindrance to the public or vehicles and only due to political reasons, for being illegal, arbitrary, motivated by political rivalry, violative of provisions of the Andhra Pradesh Panchayat Raj Act, 1994, devoid of principles of natural justice and unconstitutional and consequently direct the 4th respondent to not interfere with my house property in D.No.16-6, in an extent of 65 Sq.yards in Sy.No.96/A of Kondakeria. Atchuthapuram Mandal, Anakapalli District, by setting aside the 4th respondent notice dated 22.11.2025, and pass such 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 4th respondent to receive and consider my application for building permission, by suspending eviction notice proceedings RC No. 2/2025, dated 22.11.2025,Pending disposal of the above writ petition, and pass such Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. VINOD KUMAR PEMMASANI Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. GP FOR PANCHAYAT RAJ RURAL DEV 3 The Court made the following order: The grievance of the petitioner is that respondent No.4 is not receiving the application made for building permission and has issued eviction notice through proceedings vide Rc.No.2 of 2025 dated 22.11.2025 directing the petitioner to stop the construction work and remove the minor construction in D.No.16-6 in an extent of 65 sq yards in survey No.96/A of Kondakerla, Achuthapuram Mandal, Anakapalli District. 2. Heard Sri Vinod Kumar Pemmasani, learned counsel for the petitioner, Smt D.Chandrika, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Panchayat Raj Department and Sri Y.Koteswararao, learned standing counsel for Gram Panchayat. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner, in elaboration to what has been stated in the affidavit, contended that the petitioner is the lawful owner and possessor of the subject Gramakantam land, which was purchased by his mother in the year 1986 under a registered sale deed. Since then, the petitioner and his family have been in continuous possession and enjoyment of the subject premises by constructing a residential house. Due to the dilapidated condition of the old house, the petitioner decided to construct a new house in the same premises without any diversions or deviation, after obtaining a building plan prepared by Panchayat Licensed Surveyor in the month of October 2025. When the petitioner tried to lay a foundation, respondent No.4 has issued a show cause notice dated 27.10.2025 and 4 directed the petitioner to submit explanation along with documents pertaining to building permission. The petitioner immediately submitted his explanation dated 27.10.2025 along with the building permission application and the approved plan, however respondent No.4 refused to receive the petitioner’s application on the ground that the petitioner had encroached the Panchayat road. He further submitted that without receiving the explanation submitted by the petitioner and without affording an opportunity of hearing, respondent No.4 issued the impugned eviction notice directing the petitioner to stop the work and to remove the minor constructions raised in the subject premises. He further submitted that the petitioner submitted another explanation dated 15.12.2025 along with an application seeking approval of building permission. However, Respondent No.4, without receiving the said application, merely received the explanation without acknowledging the same. He further submitted that issuance of the impugned notice, without issuing any prior show-cause notice and without affording the petitioner an opportunity of hearing, is illegal, arbitrary, and contrary to the principles of natural justice. Hence, prayed to pass appropriate orders protecting the interest of the petitioner. 4. On the other hand, learned standing counsel for Gram Panchayat submitted that as per registered sale deed dated 25.09.1986 executed in favour of the mother of the petitioner, the extent of the subject land is only 40 sq yards. The petitioner has illegally encroached upon 25 square yards of the Panchayat road and constructed a house thereon. Several objections were 5 received from the residents of the locality stating that due to the said construction, the road has become narrow and is causing inconvenience to the public. Hence issued notice impugned. The petitioner has not raised any valid grounds warranting interference of this Court and the Writ Petition is liable to be dismissed and prayed to dismiss the Writ Petition at the admission stage. 5. Perused the record and considered the submissions made by learned counsel for the parties. 6. It is the contention of the petitioner that without following the due process of law and without receiving or considering the explanation submitted by the petitioner, respondent No.4 issued the impugned notice dated 22.11.2025 directing the petitioner to stop the construction work and remove the minor constructions raised in the subject property. The contention of learned standing counsel for Gram Panchayat is that the petitioner has encroached upon an extent of 25 sq yards of Panchayat road and constructed the house thereon, as such, the Gram Panchayat was constrained to issue the impugned notice. 7. The impugned Notice vide letter No.02/205 dated 22.11.2025, though it is styled as a notice, virtually a direction was given to the petitioner to stop the construction work and remove the encroachments. In the said notice, the Panchayat Secretary has not mentioned anything about issuance of any prior show cause notice. Without issuing prior show cause notice, without 6 considering the explanation/reply submitted by the petitioner and without affording an opportunity of being heard to the petitioner, respondent No.4 issued the impugned notice, which is in clear violation of principles of natural justice. 8. 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 but 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. 9. Taking the submissions of both the learned counsel into consideration, since the impugned notice is ex-facie illegal and unsustainable and was issued in clear violation of principles of natural justice, the same is liable to be set aside even without inviting counter. Even if counter is filed, the order would be the same. As such, this Court is inclined to allow this Writ Petition at the admission stage itself. 10. Accordingly, the Writ Petition is allowed, setting aside the Notice-2 vide Letter No.02/2025 dated 22.11.2025 issued by respondent No.4. 7 However, this order shall not preclude the respondent authorities concerned from passing fresh orders, if so advised, after duly considering the explanation submitted by the petitioner and after affording him an opportunity of being heard. There shall be no order as to costs. As a sequel thereto, interlocutory applications pending, if any in the Writ Petition, shall also stand closed. ___________________________ JUSTICE RAVI CHEEMALAPATI 22.12.2025 MP 8 240 THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE RAVI CHEEMALAPATI WRIT PETITION NO.35489 OF 2025 22.12.2025 MP