APHC010601302025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH FRIDAY,THE SEVENTH DAY OF NOVEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE RAVI CHEEMALAPATI WRIT PETITION NO: 31048/2025 Between: 1. K VARALAKSHMI, W/O K. SRIRAMULU, AGED ABOUT 48 YEARS, RESIDING AT DO.NO. 9 SAI DISTRICT. 1. THE STATE OF AP, REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, PANCHAYATI RAJ DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT, AMARAVATHI. 2. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, SRI SATYA SAI DISTRICT, PUTTAPARTHY. 3. THE DISTRICT PANCHAYAT OFFICER, SRI SATYA SAI DISTRICT, PUTTAPARTHY. 4. THE SUPERINTENDING ENGINEER, ROADS AND BUILDINGS DEPARTMENT, SRI SATYA SAI DISTRICT, PU 5. THE REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER, PENUKONDA REVENUE DIVISION, PENUKONDA. 6. THE ASSISTANT EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, PENUKONDA SECTION ROADS AND BUILDINGS DEPARTMENT, PENUKONDA. 7. TAHSILDHAR, THE PENUKONDA MANDAL, SRI SATYA SAI DISTRICT. 8. THE PANCHAYAT SECRETARY, GUTTUR GRAM PANCHAYAT, PENUKONDA MANDAL SRI SATYA SAI DISTRICT. IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) FRIDAY,THE SEVENTH DAY OF NOVEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE RAVI CHEEMALAPATI WRIT PETITION NO: 31048/2025 K VARALAKSHMI, W/O K. SRIRAMULU, AGED ABOUT 48 YEARS, RESIDING AT DO.NO. 9-62AB, VENKATAGIRIPALYAM SRI SATHYA ...PETITIONER AND THE STATE OF AP, REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, PANCHAYATI RAJ DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT, THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, SRI SATYA SAI DISTRICT, THE DISTRICT PANCHAYAT OFFICER, SRI SATYA SAI DISTRICT, THE SUPERINTENDING ENGINEER, ROADS AND BUILDINGS DEPARTMENT, SRI SATYA SAI DISTRICT, PUTTAPARTHY. THE REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER, PENUKONDA REVENUE DIVISION, PENUKONDA. THE ASSISTANT EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, PENUKONDA SECTION ROADS AND BUILDINGS DEPARTMENT, PENUKONDA. TAHSILDHAR, THE PENUKONDA MANDAL, SRI SATYA SAI THE PANCHAYAT SECRETARY, GUTTUR GRAM PANCHAYAT, PENUKONDA MANDAL SRI SATYA SAI DISTRICT. ...RESPONDENT(S): IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH [3332] FRIDAY,THE SEVENTH DAY OF NOVEMBER THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE RAVI CHEEMALAPATI K VARALAKSHMI, W/O K. SRIRAMULU, AGED ABOUT 48 YEARS, 62AB, VENKATAGIRIPALYAM SRI SATHYA ...PETITIONER THE STATE OF AP, REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, PANCHAYATI RAJ DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT, VELAGAPUDI, THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, SRI SATYA SAI DISTRICT, THE DISTRICT PANCHAYAT OFFICER, SRI SATYA SAI DISTRICT, THE SUPERINTENDING ENGINEER, ROADS AND BUILDINGS TTAPARTHY. THE REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER, PENUKONDA REVENUE THE ASSISTANT EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, PENUKONDA SECTION ROADS AND BUILDINGS DEPARTMENT, PENUKONDA. TAHSILDHAR, THE PENUKONDA MANDAL, SRI SATYA SAI THE PANCHAYAT SECRETARY, GUTTUR GRAM PANCHAYAT, ...RESPONDENT(S): RC,J W.P.No.31048 of 2025 2 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 an appropriate Writ, Order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaringthe Notice/Eviction Order in R.K.No.1/2025, dated 01.11.2025 issued by the respondent No.8 directing me to remove the structures in an extent of Ac.0.20 cents in Sy.No.203(1 E) of Guturu Village, Penukonda Mandal, Sri Satya Sai District on the Old National Highway No.44, now a designated State Highway and R and B Road (Sy.No.201 of Guturu Village Fields) passing through Guturu Gram Panchayat, Penukonda Mandal within a period of seven days as one without jurisdiction and without conducting any enquiry apart from being illegal, arbitrary, colourable exercise of power, contrary to the Andhra Pradesh Gram Panchayat Act, 1993 and violative of the Fundamental and Constitutional Right guaranteed to mw under Articles, 14, 19, 21 and 300-A of the Constitution of India and consequently direct the respondents No.3 to 8 to not to interfere with my peaceful possession and enjoyment in the structures in an extent of Ac.0.20 cents in Sy.No.203(1E) of Guturu Village, Penukonda Mandal, Sri Satya Sai District on the Old National Highway No.44, now a designated State Highway and R and B Road (Sy.No.201 of Guturu Village Fields) passing through Guturu Gram Panchayat, Penukonda Mandal by setting aside the Notice/Eviction Order in R.K.No.1/2025, dated 01.11.2025 issued by the respondent No.8 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 stay all further proceedings in pursuance of Notice/Eviction Order in R.K.No.1/2025, dated 01.11.2025 issued by the respondent No.8, pending disposal of the above Writ Petition and pass Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. B.ABHAY SIDDHANTH MOOTHA Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. GP FOR PANCHAYAT RAJ RURAL DEV 2. GP FOR ROADS BUILDINGS 3. GP FOR REVENUE The Court made the following: RC,J W.P.No.31048 of 2025 3 ORDER Questioning the Notice/Eviction order issued by respondent no.8 vide R.K.No.1/2025, dated 01.11.2025 thereby directing the petitioner to remove the structures in an extent of Ac.0-20 cents in Survey No.203(1E) of Guturu Village, Penukonda Mandal, Sri Satya Sai District, this writ petition has been filed. 2. Heard Sri B.Abhay Siddanth Mootha, learned counsel for the petitioner, Sri M.Sudheer, learned Standing Counsel for Gram Panchayat and Sri Venkata Satyanarayana, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue. 3. Sri B.Abhay Siddanth Mootha, learned counsel, while reiterating the contents of the writ affidavit would contend that the impugned notice was issued directing the petitioner to remove the structures without issuing any prior show cause notice and without providing an opportunity of being heard to the petitioner and there is a flagrant violation of principles of natural justice and hence the impugned notice is liable to be set aside. He would further contend that the Executive officer is not competent to issue notice for eviction since the land does not belong to Panchayat but belongs to Government being a State highway. He would further contend that the impugned notice having been issued by person incompetent to issue such notice and that too in RC,J W.P.No.31048 of 2025 4 violation of principles of natural justice, the same has to be set aside. Accordingly, prayed to allow the writ petition. 4. Perusal of the impugned notice shows that the petitioner was directed to remove the structures made by her encroaching the site belongs to R&B road within seven (07) days form its receipt. 5.The legal principle "no one can be condemned unheard" known as Audi Alteram Partem, asserts that before any adverse action is taken, a person must be given notice of the allegations and a reasonable opportunity to present their defense. This principle is a fundamental aspect of natural justice and a fair legal process, ensuring that decisions are made only after all relevant information has been considered. 6. Admittedly, the impugned notice does not mention issuance of any prior show cause notice and providing opportunity of personal hearing to the petitioner. Further, the notice contains a mandate for demolition of structures within the time stipulated therein or else the same would be done by panchayat at the costs of the petitioner. Issuance of such a notice not preceded by any show cause notice is violative of the principles of natural justice besides being violative of Rule-4(i) of G.O.Ms.No.188, Panchayat Raj and Rural Development (Pts.IV) Department, dated 21.07.2011, which mandates issuance of notice and hearing before proceedings for eviction. RC,J W.P.No.31048 of 2025 5 7. In view of the above, as violation of principles of natural justice is glaring on the face of the notice, inviting counter or written instructions of the authorities would be of no avail for any sort of explanation offered would not be enough to justify violation of principle of natural justice. Therefore, this writ petition is disposed of at the admission stage itself. 8. In view of the above, the impugned notice of respondent no.8 vide R.K.No.1/2025, dated 01.11.2025 is set aside. However, this order would not in any way serve as an impediment to the authorities concerned from taking necessary action in accordance with law. There shall be no order as to costs. Pending miscellaneous petitions, if any, shall stand closed. JUSTICE RAVI CHEEMALAPATI RR