APHC010063022023 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH THURSDAY,THE SIXTH DAY OF NOVEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE RAVI CHEEMALAPATI WRIT PETITION NO: 3285/2023 Between: 1. P ADI LAKSHMAMMA, W/O. LATE VENKATA RAMANA, AGED ABOUT 52 YEARS, R/O. J.P. CHERUVU VILLAGE, RACHERLA MANDAL, PRAKASAM DISTRICT 1. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP. BY PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, PANCHAYAT RAJ AND RURAL DEPARTMENT, VELAGAPUDI, GUNTUR DISTRICT. 2. THE MANDAL PARISHAD DEVELOPMENT OFFICER, RACHERLA MANDAL, PRAKASAM DISTRICT 3. THE J P CHERUVU GRAM PANCHAYAT, RACHARLA MANDAL,PRAKASAM DISTRICT REP. BY ITS PANCHAYAT SECRETARY 4. THE TAHSILDHAR, RACHERLA MANDAL, PRAKASAM 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, direction or writ, more particularly one in the nature of writ of Mandamus, declaring the impugned eviction notice vide Rc.No. 01/2023, dated 25.01.2023 issued by the 3rd respondent for eviction of the petitioner from the hayrick yard site admeasuring 5 cents in Sy.No.516 (Gramakantam Land) of J.P. Cheruvu Village, Racherla Mandal IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) THURSDAY,THE SIXTH DAY OF NOVEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE RAVI CHEEMALAPATI WRIT PETITION NO: 3285/2023 P ADI LAKSHMAMMA, W/O. LATE VENKATA RAMANA, AGED ABOUT 52 YEARS, R/O. J.P. CHERUVU VILLAGE, RACHERLA MANDAL, PRAKASAM DISTRICT ...PETITIONER AND THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP. BY PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, PANCHAYAT RAJ AND RURAL DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT, VELAGAPUDI, GUNTUR DISTRICT. THE MANDAL PARISHAD DEVELOPMENT OFFICER, RACHERLA MANDAL, PRAKASAM DISTRICT THE J P CHERUVU GRAM PANCHAYAT, RACHARLA MANDAL,PRAKASAM DISTRICT REP. BY ITS PANCHAYAT , RACHERLA MANDAL, PRAKASAM 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, direction or writ, more particularly one in the nature declaring the impugned eviction notice vide Rc.No. 01/2023, dated 25.01.2023 issued by the 3rd respondent for eviction of the petitioner from the hayrick yard site admeasuring 5 cents in Sy.No.516 (Gramakantam Land) of J.P. Cheruvu Village, Racherla Mandal IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH [3332] THURSDAY,THE SIXTH DAY OF NOVEMBER THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE RAVI CHEEMALAPATI P ADI LAKSHMAMMA, W/O. LATE VENKATA RAMANA, AGED ABOUT 52 YEARS, R/O. J.P. CHERUVU VILLAGE, RACHERLA ...PETITIONER THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP. BY PRINCIPAL DEVELOPMENT THE MANDAL PARISHAD DEVELOPMENT OFFICER, RACHERLA THE J P CHERUVU GRAM PANCHAYAT, RACHARLA MANDAL,PRAKASAM DISTRICT REP. BY ITS PANCHAYAT , RACHERLA MANDAL, PRAKASAM 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, direction or writ, more particularly one in the nature declaring the impugned eviction notice vide Rc.No. 01/2023, dated 25.01.2023 issued by the 3rd respondent for eviction of the petitioner from the hayrick yard site admeasuring 5 cents in Sy.No.516 (Gramakantam Land) of J.P. Cheruvu Village, Racherla Mandal, Prakasam District without jurisdiction and inflagrant disregard to law as illegal, arbitrary, violative of Article 14,19,21 and 300-A of The Constitution of India and consequently set aside the aforesaid impugned eviction notice of the 3rd respondent 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 to direct the respondents not to interfere with the petitioner possession and enjoyment of the Hayrick yard admeasuring 5 cents in Sy.No.516 (Gramakantam Land) of J.P. Cheruvu Village, Racherla Mandal, Prakasam District by suspending the impugned eviction notice of the 3rd respondent vide Rc.No. 01/2023, dated 25.01.2023 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 grant leave to the Petitioner/ respondent No.3 to file the counter affidavit and pass IA NO: 2 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 may be pleased to vacate the order dated. 10.05.2023 passed in W.P No. 3285 of 2023 in the interest of justice and pass Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. K RATHANGA PANI REDDY Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. VENKATA REDDY GAJJALA SC FOR ZPP, MPP, AND GRAM PANCHAYAT 2. GP FOR PANCHAYAT RAJ RURAL DEV 3. Mattegunta.Sudhir,Standing Counsel For Z.P.Ps,M.P.Ps,Gram Panchayats The Court made the following: ORDER: Impugning the notice dated 25.01.2023 issued by the 3rdrespondent directing the petitioner to evict the hayrick yard site admeasuring Ac.0-05 cents in Sy.No.516 (Gramakantam land) of J.P. Cheruvu Village, Racherla Mandal, Prakasam District, the present writ petition is filed. 2. Heard Sri K.Rathangapani Reddy, learned counsel for the petitioner, Sri M.Sudheer, learned Standing Counsel for Gram Panchayat and Ms.Naga Chandrika, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Panchayat Raj for the respondents. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner while reiterating the contents of the affidavit contended that the petitioner was in possession of the subject land since 1957 and now, the 3rd respondent issued notice dated 25.01.2023 with a direction to evict the subject land within three days failing which action would be taken under Sections 103(2) & (3) of the Andhra Pradesh Panchayat Raj Act, 1994. He further submitted that the Gram Panchayat without issuing a show cause notice or conducting any enquiry, passed the impugned order and the same is wholly unsustainable and in violation of principles of natural justice. If the said notice is allowed to subsist, it affects the rights of the petitioner, as such, prayed to pass appropriate orders protecting the interest of the petitioner. 4. On the other hand, learned Standing Counsel on counter contended that the petitioner was an encroacher and no possession certificate was also issued to the petitioner at any point of time, as such, no indulgence can be shown on the petitioner. He further contended that the petitioner cannot assail the impugned notice by filing a writ petition under article 226 of the constitution of India. The writ petition is devoid of merits and liable to be dismissed accordingly, prayed to dismiss the writ petition. 5. Perused the record and considered the submissions made by the learned counsel. 6. The impugned noticevideRc.No.01/2023 dated 25.01.2023 goes to show that the respondent Gram Panchayat directed the petitioner to evict the encroached land which is grama kantam land within three days. However, it does not refer to issuance of any prior show cause notice asking the petitioner to give explanation or providing any opportunity of being heard. The first and foremost principle of natural justice is what is commonly known as Audi Alteram Partem rule. It says that every person should get a chance of being heard. Notice is the first limb of this principle. It must be precise and unambiguous. It should appraise the party detrementively of the case he has to meet and the time for that purpose should be adequate so as to enable him to make his representation. In the absence of a notice of that kind and such reasonable opportunity, the order passed becomes wholly vitiated. Thus, it is but essential that the party should be put on notice of the case before any adverse orders passed. It is one of the most important principles of natural justice. It is after all an approved rule of fair play. Hence, the said law is settled law. In the present case, there is clear violation of principles of natural justice, as no show cause notice has been initiated by the 3rdrespondent before issuing the impugned notice. 7. As stated supra, the impugned notice has been passed in clear violation of Audi Alteram Partem rule, as such, the said order is unsustainable and is liable to be set aside. 8. Accordingly, the Writ Petition is disposed of by setting aside the impugned order vide Rc.No.01/2023 dated 25.01.2023. However, the respondents are not precluded from taking steps in accordance with law. There shall be no order as to costs. As a sequel, miscellaneous applications, pending if any, shall stand closed. _____________________________ JUSTICE RAVI CHEEMALAPATI Date: 06th November, 2025 RKS