APHC010174822026 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3331] WEDNESDAY, THE EIGHTH DAY OF APRIL TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE SUBBA REDDY SATTI WRIT PETITION NO: 8736/2026 Between: 1. KAILA SATYANARAYANA, S/O.KAILA VENKANNA, AGED ABOUT 60 YEARS, OCC.COOLIE, R/O.D.NO.8-183, BELLAPUKONDARI MERAKA BEACH ROAD, PERULAPLLEM VILLAGE, MOGALTHURI MANDAL, WEST GODAVARI DISTRICT. ...PETITIONER AND 1. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, PANCHAYATH DEPARTMENT, REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY SECRETARIAT, VELAGAPUDI, AMARAVATHI, GUNTUR DISTRICT-522239. 2. THE PERUPALLEM SOUTH GRAM PANCHAYATH, REP. BY ITS PANCHAYAT DEVELOPMENT OFFICER, MOGALTHURU MANDAL, WEST GODAVARI DISTRICT. 3. THE VILLAGE REVENUE OFFICER, PERUPALLEM SOUTH, MOGALTHURU MANDAL, WEST GODAVARI DISTRICT-534281. 4. CHENNU NARASIMHA RAO, S/O.CHENNU NAGESWARA RAO, PERUPALLEM VILLAGE, MOGALTHURU MANDAL, WEST GODAVARI DISTRICT-534281. ...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 a) issue an appropriate Writ, Order or Direction, more particularly one in the nature of a Writ of Mandamus, declaring the action of the Respondent No.2 in issuing the impugned notice dated 27.03.2026 directing demolition of a part of petitioner's property bearing Door Nos. 8-215 and 8- 215/2, situated in R.S. No.318/4, Mogalthuru Mandal, West Godavari District, as illegal, arbitrary, without jurisdiction, violative of the principles of natural justice and Articles 14, 21 and 300-A of the Constitution of India and consequently set aside the same b) consequently direct the Respondents not to take any coercive action including demolition, dispossession or interference with the petitioner's peaceful possession and enjoyment of the subject property c) pass 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 to direct the Respondents not to take any coercive steps including demolition, dispossession or interference with the petitioner's property bearing Door Nos. 8- 215 and 8-215/2, situated in R.S. No.318/4, Mogalthuru Mandal, West Godavari District, pursuant to the impugned notice dated 27.03.2026 and pass IA NO: 2 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 to permit the petitioner to amend the cause title by substituting the description of Respondent No.2 as follows To be read as The Perupallem South Gram Panchayath, Rep. by its Panchayat Development Officer, Mogalthuru Mandal, West Godavari District. Instead of The Perupallem South Gram Panchayath Mogalthuru Mandal,West Godavari District. In the cause title in W.P. No. 8736 of 2026 and pass Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. C SRINIVASA BABA Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. GP FOR PANCHAYAT RAJ RURAL DEV 2. GP FOR REVENUE The Court made the following order: Heard Sri Y.Tagore Yadav, learned counsel representing Sri C.Srinivasa Baba, learned counsel for the petitioner, Sri P.Rajesh Kumar, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Panchayat Raj and Rural Development for the 1st respondent, Sri Chaitanya, learned counsel representing Sri Y.Koteswara Rao, learned Standing counsel for the 2nd respondent and Ms. Usha, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue for the 3rd respondent. The notice in respect of the 4th respondent is dispensed with, since no adverse order is passed affecting the right or interests of the 4th respondent. 2. Impugning the notice dated 27.03.2026 (Ex.P1) issued by the Panchayat Secretary of the 2nd respondent, the petitioner filed the above writ petition. 3. The designation of the Panchayat Secretary has been changed to Panchayat Development Officer. Hence, both designations are used in order. 4. Earlier, the Panchayat Secretary of the 2nd respondent issued a show cause notice dated 08.12.2025 alleging encroachment by the petitioner. Challenging the same, the petitioner filed W.P.No.34596 of 2025. The said writ petition was disposed of on 10.12.2025. The operative portion of the order reads as follows: <The petitioner is at liberty to submit an explanation to the said show cause notice which is served on him on 09.12.2025 within the time stipulated in the said show cause notice. On receipt of the same, the respondent authorities shall pass a reasoned order by providing an opportunity of personal hearing to him in accordance with law. If no explanation is submitted by the petitioner within the stipulated time, the respondent authorities shall take steps in accordance with law.= 5. Thereafter, the petitioner submitted an explanation dated 09.12.2025 (Ex.P2), which was received by the Panchayat Secretary on 23.12.2025, as seen from the endorsement. The Panchayat Development Officer, Perupalem South Gram Panchayat, passed the order impugned dated 27.03.2026 (Ex.P1) in the form of a notice directing the petitioner to remove the toilets constructed on the cart track. 6. Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the notice impugned, dated 27.03.2026 (Ex.P1) is in the form of an order. No opportunity of hearing is provided to the petitioner. 7. This Court, by an order dated 02.04.2026, having noted the violation of the order dated 10.12.2025 in W.P.No.34596 of 2025, directed the Panchayat Secretary of the 2nd respondent to appear before this Court. 8. Accordingly, Smt. P.Kumari, Panchayat Development Officer (Panchayat Secretary) of the 2nd respondent, appeared before this Court. 9. The Panchayat Development Officer of the 2nd respondent stated orally that the earlier Panchayat Secretary (Panchayat Development Officer) had not handed over the records. The record relating to the case was handed over to the officer on 04.04.2026. The Panchayat Development Officer of the 2nd respondent orally offered an unconditional apology and stated that the mistake would not be repeated. The oral submission made by the officer is made part of the record. 10. Sri Chaitanya, learned counsel representing Sri Y.Koteswara Rao, learned Standing counsel for the 2nd respondent, would fairly submit that the notice impugned was passed contrary to the order dated 10.12.2025 in W.P.No.34596 of 2025. 11. Given the facts and circumstances of the case, without going into the merits of the matter, the writ petition is disposed of, at the stage of admission, with the consent of all the learned counsel, with the following directions: i) The notice impugned dated 27.03.2026 (Ex.P1) is hereby set aside. ii) Since the petitioner has submitted an explanation dated 19.12.2025 (Ex.P2) pursuant to the order dated 10.12.2025 in W.P.No.34596 of 2025, the Panchayat Development Officer of the 2nd respondent shall consider the same by providing an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner, and pass a reasoned order in accordance with law, and communicate the same to the petitioner. iii) Till a reasoned order is passed, the Panchayat Development Officer of the 2nd respondent shall not interfere with the petitioner’s house bearing D.Nos.8-215 and 8-215/2, R.S.No.318/4, Perupalem South, Mogalthuru Mandal, West Godavari District. iv) There shall be no order as to costs. As a sequel, pending miscellaneous petitions, if any, shall stand closed. ___________________________ JUSTICE SUBBA REDDY SATTI Date: 08.04.2026 SNI 175 THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE SUBBA REDDY SATTI WRIT PETITION NO: 8736 OF 2026 Date: 08.04.2026 SNI