APHC010109552025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3328] THURSDAY, THE SIXTH DAY OF MARCH TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE GANNAMANENI RAMAKRISHNA PRASAD WRIT PETITION NO: 5576/2025 Between: 1. BOLLI VEERAJU, S/O.BOLLI RAJA RAO AGED 54 YEARS, OCC BUSINESS R/O.D.NO.3-38, ADDANKIVARI VEEDHI SEETHANAGARAM, MIRTHIPADU, EAST GODAVARI DISTRICT ANDHRA PRADESH,. 2. POTHIREDDY ANJANEYULU, S/O.POTHIREDDY SURYARAO AGED 42 YEARS, OCC BUSINESS, R/O.D.NO.1-53/1 RAMALAYAM STREET, SEETHANAGARAM MANDAL MIRTHIPADU, EAST GODAVARI DISTRICT, AP 3. BOLLI VIJAYALAKSHMI, W/O.BOLLI RAJENDRA PRASAD AGED 55 YEARS, OCCIBUSINESS, R/O.D.NO.3-37/2 BUS STAND ADDANKI ROAD, SEETHANAGARAM MIRTHIPADU, E.G.DISTRICT, A ...PETITIONER(S) AND 1. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP.BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, PANCHAYAT RAJ AND RURAL DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT A.P. SECRETARIAT, VELAGAPUDI AMARAVATHI, GUNTUR DISTRICT 2. THE DISTRICT PANCHAYAT OFFICER, EAST GODAVARI DISTRICT, RAJAMAHENDRAVARAM ANDHRA PRADESH 3. THE MIRTHIPADU GRAMPANCHAYAT, MIRTHIPADU, SEETHANAGARAM MANDAL EAST GODAVARI DISTRICT, ANDHRA 2 PRADESH REP.BY ITS EXECUTIVE OFFICER ...RESPONDENT(S): Counsel for the Petitioner(S): 1. YASWANTH GADE Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. GP FOR PANCHAYAT RAJ RURAL DEV 2. Y KOTESWARA RAO The Court made the following: ORAL ORDER: Heard Sri A. Lalith, learned Counsel representing Sri Yaswanth Gade, learned Counsel for the Writ Petitioners; Sri Panku Rajesh Kumar, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Panchayat Raj; Sri V. Sai Kiran, learned Counsel appearing on behalf of Sri Y. Koteswara Rao, learned Standing Counsel for Gram Panchayat. 2. Learned Counsel for the Writ Petitioners has drawn the attention of this Court to the Impugned Notice issued by the Panchayat Secretary, Gram Panchayat (Respondent No.3), dated 19.02.2025 (Ex.P.1). Learned Counsel for the Writ Petitioners would submit that the Official Respondents have not followed the due process of law, inasmuch as they have not followed the procedure contemplated in the Andhra Pradesh Gram Panchayat (Protection of Property) Rules, 2011 (G.O.Ms.No.188, Panchayat Raj and Rural Development (Pts.IV) Department, dated 21.07.2011) (in short, ‘Rules’) (Ex.P.4). 3. Learned Counsel for the Petitioners has drawn the attention of this Court to the eviction procedure contemplated in Rule 4 of the Rules and would submit that the Respondents have not followed the procedure contemplated in the Rules. 3 4. This Court has perused the Impugned Notice, dated 19.02.2025 (Ex.P.1) as well as the relevant Rules, particularly Rule No.4 of the Rules. 5. Having considered the same, this Court is of the view that the Impugned Notice is unsustainable in law, inasmuch as the Notice has been issued straight away for eviction without issuing prior notice and providing an opportunity of hearing to the Writ Petitioners to explain their case. 6. Having regard to the same, the Writ Petition is allowed setting aside the Impugned Notice issued by the Panchayat Secretary, Gram Panchayat, Seethanagaram Mandal (Respondent No.3), dated 19.02.2025 (Ex.P.1). However, liberty is granted to the Official Respondents to issue a fresh notice, if so advised, by following the due process of law. No order as to costs. 7. Interlocutory Applications, if any, stand closed in terms of this order. ______________________________________ GANNAMANENI RAMAKRISHNA PRASAD, J Dt: 06.03.2025 DSV