APHC010359592021 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3332] MONDAY,THE TWENTY SECOND DAY OF DECEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE RAVI CHEEMALAPATI WRIT PETITION NO: 21548/2021 Between: 1. M/S VIRTUE INDUSTRIES, REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING PARTNER, MUSUNURU SIVA RAMA KRISHNA HAVING ITS REGISTERED OFFICE AT 313/1A, QUARRY STREET, PARITALA, KANCHIKACHARLA MANDAL, KRISHNA DISTRICT - 521180 AND HAVING ITS CORPORATE OFFICE AT D. NO 59-5-1/2, SANTHI NILAYAM, BESIDES GOVT. ITI COLLEGE, ASHOK NAGAR, VIJAYAWADA, KRISHNA DISTRICT. 2. MUSUNURU SIVA RAMA KRISHNA,, S/O. MALLIKARJUNA RAO, AGED 56 YEARS R/ O. D. NO 59- 5-1/2, SANTHI NILAYAM, BESIDES GOVT. ITI COLLEGE, ASHOK NAGAR, VIJAYAWADA, KRISHNA DISTRICT ...PETITIONER(S) AND 1. STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF PANCHAYAT RAJ AND RURAL DEVELOPMENT, SECRETARIAT, VELAGAPUDI, GUNTUR DISTRICT. 2. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, KRISHNA DISTRICT. 2 3. THE MANDAL DEVELOPMENT OFFICER, KANCHIKACHERLA MANDAL, KRISHNA DISTRICT. 4. THE TAHSILDAR, PARITALA VILLAGE, KANCHIKACHERLA MANDAL, KRISHNA DISTRICT. 5. THE PARITALA GRAM PANCHAYAT, REP BY ITS SECRETARY, PARITALA VILLAGE, KANCHIKACHERLA MANDAL, KRISHNA DISTRICT. 6. THE MANDAL SURVEYOR, KANCHIKACHERLA MANDAL, KRISHNA 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 toto issue an appropriate writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the actions respondents herein in conducting survey on 21/09/2021 without issuing any notice and subsequently trying to demolish the existing compound wall covering an extent of Ac.1.04 cents in Sy.No.313/ 2A, Sy.No.313/ 1A1, Paritala Village, Kanchikacherla Mandal, Krishna District of the petitioners herein without following the due process of law as contemplated under the Andhra Pradesh Panchayat Act, with utter disregard to the principles of natural justice and also in violation of Articles 14, 19, 21 and 300A of Constitution Of India and consequentially direct the respondents to not demolish the existing compound wall covering an extent of Ac.1.04 cents in Sy. No.313 / 2A, Sy. No.313 / 2A, Sy. No.313 / 1 A 1, Paritala Village, Kanchikacherla Mandal, Krishna District without following the due process of law and giving the petitioner an opportunity of hearing and to pass IA NO: 1 OF 2021 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 3 herein to conduct a fresh survey in the petitioners presence by following the due process \of law in the extent of Ac.1.04 cents in Sy.No.313/2A, Sy.No.313/ 1A1, Paritala Village, Kanchikacherla Mandal, Krishna District and to pass IA NO: 2 OF 2021 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 herein not to demolish the existing Galvanized Iron compound wall covering an extent of Ac.1.04 cents in Sy. No.313 / 2A, Sy.No.313/ 1A1, Paritala Village, Kanchikacherla Mandal, Krishna District and to pass IA NO: 3 OF 2021 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 vacate the interim order granted on 24.09.2021 in I.A.No. 2 of 2021 in W.P.No.21548 of 2021 and pass Counsel for the Petitioner(S): 1. KILARU NITHIN KRISHNA Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. GP FOR REVENUE 2. Yarraguntla.Koteswara Rao,Standing Counsel For Zilla Praja Parishads,Mandal Praja Parishads and Gra 3. GP FOR PANCHAYAT RAJ RURAL DEV 4 The Court made the following order: Challenging the highhanded action of the respondent authorities in conducting a survey on 21.09.2021 without issuing any notice and without following due process of law, and subsequently trying to demolish the existing compound wall covering an extent of Ac.1.04 cents situated in Sy.Nos.313/2A & Sy.No.313/1A1 of Paritala Village, Kanchikacheral Mandal, Krisha District, the present writ petition is filed. 2. Heard Ms. B. Alekhya, learned counsel representing Sri Kilaru Nithin Krishna, learned counsel for the petitioners, Sri Y. Koteswara Rao, learned Standing Counsel for the Gram Panchayat, Ms. Naga Chandrika, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Panchayat Raj and Sri M. Chandrasekhar, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioners, while reiterating the contents of the affidavit, submitted that when the authorities, under the name of the survey, tired to demolish the petitioners’ compound wall without issuing any notice, the present writ petition has been filed, and this Court, by way of interim order dated 24.09.2021, protected the interest of the petitioners. She further submitted that if at all the respondent authorities intend to 5 acquire any property for a public purpose, they are bound to follow due process of law, but they cannot straightaway interfere with or make any attempts to demolish the existing structures on the subject land. As such, prayed to pass appropriate orders treating the interim order as final orders. 4. On the other hand, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue submitted that pursuant to the interim direction issued by this Court, a survey was conducted and it was identified that the petitioners have encroached 17 cents of land in the said village. He further submitted that the authorities would take appropriate steps to remove the encroachments in accordance with law. As such, the writ petition is devoid of merits and is liable to be dismissed. 5. Perused the record and considered the submissions made by both the learned counsel. 6. The main grievance of the petitioners is that under the guise of conducting a survey, the respondent authorities are highhandedly trying to demolish the petitioners’ compound wall. The contention of the learned Standing Counsel is that certain encroachments have been identified and that appropriate steps would be taken in accordance with law to remove the said 6 encroachments. When admittedly there is an encroachment, it is a well settled principle of law that even the encroacher is entitled for a notice. In view of the same, this Court, instead of keeping the writ petition pending, is inclined to dispose of the writ petition by passing the following order: “The respondent authorities are directed not to interfere with or make any attempts to demolish the petitioners’ compound wall covering an extent of Ac.1.04 cents situated in Sy.Nos.313/2A & Sy.No.313/1A1 of Paritala Village, Kanchikacheral Mandal, Krishna District, except in accordance with law.” 7. Accordingly, the Writ Petition is disposed of. 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 Date: 22.12.2025 ANS 7 276 THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE RAVI CHEEMALAPATI WRIT PETITION NO: 21548/2021 Date: 22.12.2025 ANS