APHC010138962023 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH FRIDAY, THE TWENTY EIGHTH DAY OF NOVEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE RAVI CHEEMALAPATI WRIT PETITION NO: Between: 1. CHILAKALAPUDI HARIKRISHNA, S/O. VENKATESWARLU AGE 31 YEARS, OCC. AGRICULTURE R/O. 1 BHIMAVARAM MANDAL WEST GODAVARI DISTRICT, A.P. 1. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP. BY PRL. GOVERNMENT PANCHAYATRAJ DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT, VELAGAPUDI, GUNTUR DISTRICT 2. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, WEST GODAVARI DISTRICT AT BHIMAVARAM 3. THE DISTRICT PANCHAYAT OFFICER, BHIMAVARAM, WEST GODAVARI DISTRICT 4. THE TAHSILDAR, BHIMAVAR DISTRICT 5. THE NAGIDIPALEM GRAM PANCHAYAT, REP. BY ITS SECRETARY, NAGIDIPALEM, BHIMAVARAM MANDAL WEST GODAVARI DISTRICT, A.P. 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 appropriate Writ, Order or direction more particularly one IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) FRIDAY, THE TWENTY EIGHTH DAY OF NOVEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE RAVI CHEEMALAPATI WRIT PETITION NO: 7057/2023 CHILAKALAPUDI HARIKRISHNA, S/O. VENKATESWARLU AGE 31 YEARS, OCC. AGRICULTURE R/O. 1-237, NAGIDIPALEM, BHIMAVARAM MANDAL WEST GODAVARI DISTRICT, A.P. ...PETITIONER AND THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP. BY PRL. SECETARY TO GOVERNMENT PANCHAYATRAJ DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT, VELAGAPUDI, GUNTUR DISTRICT THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, WEST GODAVARI DISTRICT AT THE DISTRICT PANCHAYAT OFFICER, BHIMAVARAM, WEST GODAVARI DISTRICT THE TAHSILDAR, BHIMAVARAM MANDAL, WEST GODAVARI THE NAGIDIPALEM GRAM PANCHAYAT, REP. BY ITS SECRETARY, NAGIDIPALEM, BHIMAVARAM MANDAL WEST GODAVARI ...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 appropriate Writ, Order or direction more particularly one IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH [3332] FRIDAY, THE TWENTY EIGHTH DAY OF NOVEMBER THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE RAVI CHEEMALAPATI CHILAKALAPUDI HARIKRISHNA, S/O. VENKATESWARLU AGE 31 237, NAGIDIPALEM, BHIMAVARAM MANDAL WEST GODAVARI DISTRICT, A.P. ...PETITIONER SECETARY TO GOVERNMENT PANCHAYATRAJ DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT, THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, WEST GODAVARI DISTRICT AT THE DISTRICT PANCHAYAT OFFICER, BHIMAVARAM, WEST AM MANDAL, WEST GODAVARI THE NAGIDIPALEM GRAM PANCHAYAT, REP. BY ITS SECRETARY, NAGIDIPALEM, BHIMAVARAM MANDAL WEST GODAVARI ...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 appropriate Writ, Order or direction more particularly one 2 in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the impugned orders dt.14.03.2023 passed by the 5th respondent Panchayat Secretary without considering explanation/reply of the petitioner dt.26-12-2022 contrary to orders of this hon'ble court in W.P.No.39343/2022 and without giving opportunity of hearing and produce documents and even without considering existence of petitioner's mothers patta land assigned by the government and without demarcating the alleged occupation by affixing stones as illegal and arbitrary as illegal, arbitrary against principles of natural justice and violative of the rights of the petitioner under Articles 14,21, and 300A of the Constitution of India besides violation of provisions of the A.P. Assigned land (Prohibition of Transfer Act), 1977 and rule 3 of the rules of Act, 1977 and consequently set aside the impugned orders dt.14.03.2023 passed by the 5th respondent Panchayat Secretary 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 stay all further proceedings pursuant to impugned orders dt.14.03.2023 passed by the 5th respondent Panchayat Secretary and pass IA NO: 2 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 vacate the interim orders dated 21.03.2023 passed in WP No. 7057 of 2023 and dismiss the writ petition and pass Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. N N SOMENDRA REDDY Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. GP FOR REVENUE 2. GP FOR PANCHAYAT RAJ RURAL DEV 3. N SRIHARI (Standing Counsel for ZPP MPP and GRAM PANCHAYAT) 3 The Court made the following order: The grievance of the petitioner is that respondent No.5, without considering the explanation/reply submitted by the petitioner dated 26.12.2022, contrary to the orders of this Court in Writ Petition No.39343 of 2022 and without giving an opportunity of hearing and produce documents, passed order dated 14.03.2023. 2. Heard Sri N.N.Somendra Reddy, learned counsel for the petitioner, Sri Bala Krishna, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Panchayat Raj, 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 absolute owner and possessor of land admeasuring Ac.0.02 cents inherited from his father, along with Ac.0.01 cents assigned to his mother in Sy.No.205 of Nagidipalem Village, Bhimavaram Mandal, where a residential RCC house bearing Door No.1-237 exists and the petitioner has been paying property tax regularly. He further submitted that some third parties filed a W.P.No.17663/2022 seeking removal of encroachments, wherein this Court directed the District Collector to conduct enquiry and take appropriate action within four weeks. Pursuant to the said direction, respondent No.5 has issued a notice alleging encroachment without conducting any proper survey or demarcation. The petitioner challenged the said notice by way of W.P. No.39343/2022, wherein this Court directed the petitioner to submit an explanation and directed the respondent 4 No.5 to pass orders after considering the said explanation and also directed respondent No.5 not to take any coercive steps with regard to subject property. He further submitted that the petitioner submitted his explanation on 26.12.2022, however, ignoring the same, respondent No.5 passed the impugned order dated 14.03.2023 directing the petitioner to remove the alleged encroachment without issuance of prior notice and without hearing, which is in violation of principles of natural justice. Hence, prayed to pass appropriate orders protecting the interest of the petitioner. 4. On the other hand, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Panchayat Raj Department, while reiterating the contents of the counter affidavit, contended that after enquiry made by the Panchayat Secretary, Gram Panchayat, Nagidipalem, it is found that 24 persons have encroached the Cheruvu Poramboke, which is not heritable and constructed houses. The Gram Panchayat has issued notices to all the encroachers to remove the encroachments, but they have not produced any documentary evidence nor vacated the encroachments, even granted sufficient time to them. Hence, no indulgence need be shown on the petitioner and prayed to dismiss the Writ Petition. 5. Learned standing counsel for Gram Panchayat submitted that there is neither illegality nor procedural irregularity in passing the impugned order. He further submitted that if the petitioner has any grievance against the said order, he can prefer an appeal before the Gram panchayat as provided under Section 128 of Panchayat Raj Act. The petitioner has not raised any valid 5 grounds warranting interference of this Court and the Writ Petition has to be dismissed and prayed to dismiss the Writ Petition at the admission stage. 6. Perused the record and considered the submissions made by learned counsel for the parties. 7. The contention of the petitioner is that without considering the explanation of the petitioner, the impugned order has been passed by respondent No.5, which is in clear violation of principles of natural justice. Here, Rule 4 (1) of the G.O.Ms.No.188 Panchayat Raj and Rural Development (PTO.IV) Department, dated 21.07.2011, which is relevant for the present case and is extracted for quick reference. 4. EVICTION OF ENCROACHMENTS: (i) Where it is brought to the notice that any property of the Panchayat is under occupation of any persons the Executive authority (Panchayat Secretary) shall serve a notice to the party concerned and give a brief hearing before proceeding for eviction. 8. As per the said provision, an opportunity of being heard is required to be provided to the encroachers. A perusal of the impugned proceedings, except stating that the petitioner has not submitted any documents, no cogent reasons in detail have been given. As rightly contended by the learned counsel for the petitioner, the impugned order does not indicate anything about prior issuance of show cause notice to the petitioner seeking explanation. Passing the impugned order, with such a direction, without issuing any prior show cause notice is unsustainable under law. 6 9. 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. 10. In the said circumstances, the order is unsustainable and it has been passed in clear violation of audi alteram partem rule and in utter ignorance of Rule 4 (i) of G.O.Ms.No.188, dated 21.07.2011 and it has to be set aside at the admission stage. 11. Taking the submissions of both the learned counsel into consideration, since the impugned order 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. 12. Accordingly, the Writ Petition is allowed, setting aside the order dated 14.03.2023 issued by respondent No.5. However, this order does not preclude the authorities concerned from passing fresh orders by providing an 7 opportunity of being heard to the petitioner and by taking into consideration his explanation/reply dated 26.12.2022. 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 28.11.2025 MP 8 527 THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE RAVI CHEEMALAPATI WRIT PETITION NO.7057 OF 2023 28.11.2025 MP