Chilaukabatthula Venkateswara Rao v. State of Andhra Pradesh
WP/9822/2026 · 2026-04-09
Subba Reddy Satti
body2026
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2026 DAILYLAW 1011 (AP) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2026 DAILYLAW 1011 (AP) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
APHC010195042026
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3331] FRIDAY,THE TENTH DAY OF APRIL TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE SUBBA REDDY SATTI WRIT PETITION NO: 9822/2026 Between:
1. CHILAUKABATTHULA VENKATESWARA RAO, S/O VEERASWAMY AGED 60 YEARS,OCC PAN SHOP BUSINESS, R/O BADARALA VILLAGE, LINGAPALEM MANDAL, ELURU DISTRICT (ERSTWHILE WEST GODAVARI DISTRICT). ...PETITIONER AND
1. STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT PANCHAYAT RAJ AND RURAL DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT, VELAGAPUDI, AMARAVATI, GUNTUR DISTRICT. 522 501
2. BADARALA GRAM PANCHAYAT, REP. BY ITS EXECUTIVE AUTHORITY-CUM-PANCHAYAT SECRETARY,
BADARALA VILLAGE, LINGAPALEM MANDAL, ELURU DISTRICT, (ERSTWHILE WEST GODAVARI DISTRICT).534 462
3. TAHSILDAR, LINGAPALEM MANDAL,
ELURU DISTRICT, (ERSTWHILE WEST GODAVARI DISTRICT).534 462
4. STATION HOUSE OFFICER, DHARMAJIGUDEM POLICE STATION, LINGAPALEM MANDAL, ELURU DISTRICT, (ERSTWHILE WEST GODAVARI DISTRICT). 534 462
SRS,J
W.P.No.9822 of 2026
5. KAMBHAMPATI KASI VISWANADHAM, S/O NAGESWARA RAO, AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS, OCC CULTIVATION, R/O D.NO. 63,S.C.
COLONY, KALLACHERUVU VILLAGE, LINGAPALEM MANDAL, ELURU DISTRICT, (ERSTWHILE WEST GODAVARI DISTRICT). 534 462
6. KAMBHAMPATI SATYANARAYANA, S/O NAGESWARA RAO, AGED ABOUT 41 YEARS OCC CULTIVATION, R/O D.NO. 1-46 POLASIGUDEM VILLAGE, KAMAVARAPUKOTA MANDAL, ELURU DISTRICT, (ERSTWHILE WEST GODAVARI DISTRICT).534 449
7. KAMBHAMPATI SATYANARAYANA, S/O KRISHNA MURTHY, AGED ABOUT 39 YEARS OCC CULTIVATION, R/O D.NO. 1-4 SCHOOL STREET, POLASIGUDEM VILLAGE, KAMAVARAPUKOTA MANDAL, ELURU DISTRICT, (ERSTWHILE WEST GODAVARI DISTRICT).534 449
8. KAMBHAMPATI APPA RAO, S/O KRISHNA MURTHY, AGED ABOUT 34 YEARS OCC CULTIVATION, R/O D.NO. 1-49 SCHOOL STREET, POLASIGUDEM VILLAGE, KAMAVARAPUKOTA MANDAL, ELURU DISTRICT, (ERSTWHILE WEST GODAVARI DISTRICT).534 449
9. KAMBHAMPATI SATYANARAYANA, S/O APPA RAO, AGED ABOUT 74 YEARS OCC CULTIVATION, R/O D.NO. 1-99 PANCHAYATI ROAD, POLASIGUDEM VILLAGE KAMAVARAPUKOTA MANDAL, ELURU DISTRICT, (ERSTWHILE WEST GODAVARI DISTRICT).534 449
...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 be pleased to issue a writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of WRIT OF MANDAMUS declaring the Encroachment Removal Notice, dt.
08-04-2026 issued by the 2nd respondent thereby informed the petitioner that he would demolish the petitioners house bearing Door No 2- 32, Assessment No 214674000181 raised with asbestos roof sheet and pan shop situated in Survey No.3-1 situated in Badarala Village, Lingapalem Mandal, Eluru District (Erstwhile West Godavari District), with the help of the respondents 3 and 4 on 15.04.2026, without conducting survey, without considering the documents i.e house tax receipt, water tax receipt, electricity
SRS,J
W.P.No.9822 of 2026
bill receipts etc, without conducting enquiry, without giving opportunity of personal hearing and without passing reasoned/speaking order, as illegal, arbitrary, violative of principles of natural justice and offends Articles 14 and 21 of Constitution of India and consequently set aside the Encroachment Removal Notice, dt. 08-04-2026 issued by the 2 further direct the respondents 2 to 4 not to dispossess the petitioner from his above said house and pan shop without following due of law and pass such IA NO: 1 OF 2026 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 may be pleased to suspend the operation of the Encroachment Removal Notice, dt. 08-04-2026 issued by the 2nd respondent and further direct the respondents 2 to 4 not to dispossess the petitioner from his house bearing Door No: 2-32, Assessment No: 214674000181 raised with asbestos roof sheet and pan shop situated in Survey No.3-1 situated in Badarala Village, Lingapalem Mandal, Eluru District (Erstwhile West Godavari District), pending disposal of the main writ petition and pass such Counsel for the Petitioner:
1. SRINIVAS AMBATI Counsel for the Respondent(S):
1. GP FOR PANCHAYAT RAJ RURAL DEV The Court made the following:
::ORDER ::
Heard Sri Srinivas Ambati, learned counsel for the petitioner; Sri P. Rajesh, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Panchayat Raj, for respondent No.1; Sri Chaitanya,
learned counsel representing Sri Y. Koteswara Rao, learned standing counsel for respondent No.2; Ms. P. Usha, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue, for respondent No.3 and Sri V. Farooq, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Home, for respondent No.4.
SRS,J
W.P.No.9822 of 2026
2. Notice in respect of respondents 5 to 9 is dispensed with since no adverse order affecting their rights or interests is passed.
3. Assailing the notice, dated 08.04.2026 (Ex.P2), issued by Panchayat Secretary of respondent No.2, to demolish the petitioner’s house bearing D.No.2-32, assessment No.214674000181, S.No.3-1, situated in Badarala Village, Lingapalem Mandal, Eluru District, without following due the procedure, the above writ petition was filed.
4.
Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner, landless poor, occupied a piece of land in R.S.No.3-1, Badarala Village, Lingapalem Mandal, Eluru District, about three decades back and constructed an asbestos-roofed shed. The petitioner has been residing and eking out his livelihood by running a pan shop. The petitioner obtained an electricity connection vide S.C.No.1516834003000337 and has been paying taxes.
5. While so, respondents 5 to 9 herein filed W.P.No.9305 of 2023 against the petitioner and two others, complaining of the inaction on the part of the official respondents in removing the encroachment on the road margin, abutting their agricultural lands. The said writ petition was disposed of on
01.12.2025. The operative portion of the order reads thus: <The Gram Panchayat concerned shall take steps for removal of encroachments, if any made in petitioners’ agricultural lands near Sy.No.3 of Badarala Revenue Village, Lingapalem Mandal, Eluru District in accordance with law by issuing show cause notices to all the concerned parties inviting explanation by giving reasonable time and to pass a reasoned order after providing an opportunity of being heard and communicate the same to all the parties concerned in accordance with law within three(03) months.=
6. In pursuance of the order, dated 01.12.2025, the Panchayat Secretary of respondent No.2 issued Ex.P1, notice. However, in Ex.P1, it was mentioned
SRS,J
W.P.No.9822 of 2026
that the High Court of Andhra Pradesh directed the authority to remove the encroachment. It was further mentioned that the petitioner shall submit documents, if any, within 21 days. Since the petitioner could not submit any document, Ex.P2, notice impugned in the writ petition, was issued. Of course, as rightly pointed out by the Panchayat Secretary of respondent No.4, the petitioner did not submit any documents and hence, Ex.P2, was issued.
7. During the hearing, the learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner will submit an explanation within ten days from today by annexing the relevant documents.
8.
Learned counsel appearing for respondent No.4 endorses the same.
9. Given the facts and circumstances of the case, to give one more opportunity to the petitioner, this writ petition is disposed of at the admission, giving liberty to the petitioner to submit an explanation within ten days from today. Upon receipt of the petitioner’s explanation, the learned Panchayat Secretary of respondent No.2 shall consider the same, provide an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner and any other concerned, pass a reasoned order and communicate the same to the petitioner, within six weeks thereafter.
Till a reasoned order is passed, respondent No.2 shall not take any coercive steps pursuant to Exs.P1 and P2 notices. There shall be no order as to costs.
As a sequel, pending miscellaneous petitions, if any, shall stand closed.
___________________________ JUSTICE SUBBA REDDY SATTI Date: 10.04.2026 IKN
SRS,J
W.P.No.9822 of 2026
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE SUBBA REDDY SATTI
WRIT PETITION NO: 9822 of 2026
Date: 10.04.2026 IKN