APHC010555662025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3332] THURSDAY,THE SIXTH DAY OF NOVEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE RAVI CHEEMALAPATI WRIT PETITION NO: 28633/2025 Between: Chittimenu Kondayya and Others ...PETITIONER(S) AND The State Of Ap and Others ...RESPONDENT(S) Counsel for the Petitioner(S): 1. P VIVEK Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. GP FOR PANCHAYAT RAJ RURAL DEV The Court made the following order: Aggrieved by the issuance of impugned notice dated 28.08.2025 by the 3rd respondent directing the petitioners to remove the unauthorized structures made in the subject property, without following the procedure contemplated under law, the present writ petition is filed. 2. Heard Sri P.Vivek, learned counsel for the petitioners, Sri Y.Koteswara rao, learned Standing counsel for MPP, ZPP & Gram Panchayat and Smt Naga Chandrika, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Gram Panchayat. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioners in elaboration to what has been stated in the affidavit contended that, the petitioners are the absolute owners of the subject land admeasuring Ac.0.28 cents and Ac.0.26 cents respectively in Sy.No.394/1A situated in Pamarru, Kota Village, K.Gangavaram Mandal, Dr.B.R.Ambedkar Konaseema District, which is classified as Gramakantam land and they have been in continuous possession and uninterrupted enjoyment of the said land from nearly 70 years by constructing two houses and cattle sheds. He further submitted that, the 3rd respondent issued impugned notice dated 28.08.2025 and thereby directed the petitioners to remove the unauthorized structures within two(02) days. The said impugned notice was served on the petitioners on 30.08.2025 and the petitioners have immediately issued legal notice through advocate on 01.09.2025 and without issuing any reply to the said legal notice, the respondent authorities, on 13.10.2025 have visited the subject land and tried to disposess the petitioners. Learned counsel for the petitioners further contended that the said impugned notice was issued without issuing any prior show cause notice seeking explanation and without providing an opportunity of being heard to the petitioner. He further submitted that, the impugned proceedings though styled as notice, virtually it is a direction given to the petitioners to remove the unauthorized structures within two(02) days, failing which they will remove the unauthorized structures and recover the expenses incurred from the petitioners. If the direction contained in the said notice is allowed to materialize, the rights of the petitioners will be affected. As such, prayed to pass appropriate orders in that regard. 4. On the other hand, learned Standing counsel for Gram Panchayat contended that the petitioners are the encroachers and no indulgence need be shown on them and in case, if this Court inclines to interfere with the said impugned notice/proceedings, liberty may be given to the concerned authority to take steps in accordance with law. 5. Perused the impugned notice/proceedings dated 28.08.2025. As rightly contended by the learned counsel for the petitioners, the impugned notice does not speak anything about prior issuance of any show-cause notice to the petitioners seeking their explanation. It is well settled that, even an encroacher is entitled for a reasonable notice. 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. Therefore, in view of the above, issuing the impugned notice with such a direction, without issuing any prior show-cause notice and without providing an opportunity of being heard to the petitioners, is un-sustainable under law. As such, the impugned notice is ex-facie illegal, unsustainable and was issued in clear violation of principles of natural justice. In view of the above stated circumstances, there is no purpose in keeping this writ petition pending inviting counter. As such, this Court is inclined to set aside the impugned notice dated 28.08.2025, at the admission stage itself. Accordingly, the Writ Petition is disposed of by setting aside the impugned notice dated 28.08.2025. However, this order does not preclude the concerned authority to take steps in accordance with law, by issuing proper show-cause notice/ inviting explanation and providing an opportunity of personal hearing and to pass a reasoned order and communicate the same to the concerned parties. There shall be no order as to costs. Miscellaneous applications, pending if any, shall stand closed. ___________________________ JUSTICE RAVI CHEEMALAPATI BRS