APHC010108502023 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3332] MONDAY,THE FIFTH DAY OF JANUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE RAVI CHEEMALAPATI WRIT PETITION NO: 5438/2023 Between: 1. SRI GOLI RAMA RAO,, S/O. KOTESWARA RAO, AGED ABOUT- 67 YEARS, OCC- AGRICULTURIST, D.NO.1-100, BHIMADOLE - 534425, ELURU DISTRICT. 2. NALI SUNITHA, W/O. NAGARAJU, AGED ABOUT- 37 YEARS, OCC- HOUSEWIFE, D.NO.1-100, BHIMADOLE - 534425, ELURU DISTRICT. ...PETITIONER(S) AND 1. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, PANCHAYAT RAJ DEPARTMENT, AP SECRETARIAT, VELAGAPUDI, AMARAVATI, GUNTUR DISTRICT. 2. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, ELURU DISTRICT. 3. THE DISTRICT PANCHAYAT OFFICER, ELURU. 4. THE DIVISIONAL PANCHAYAT OFFICER, ELURU. 5. THE MANDAL PARISHAD DEVELOPMENT OFFICER, BHIMADOLE. 6. THE BHIMADOLE GRAMA PANCHAYAT, REP. BY ITS PANCHAYAT SECRETARY, BHIMADOLE, ELURU 2 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 topleased to issue a writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of WRIT OF MANDAMUS declaring the Notice R.C.No.23/2021, dt.21.02.2023 issued by the 6th respondent asking the petitioner to remove the constructions within a period of 3 days without calling for explanation and further contemplating to demolish the structures of the petitioners building an extent of 351-256 square meters in R.S. No.67/1 situated at Bhimadole Village and Mandal, East Godavari District as illegal, illegal, arbitrary, unjust and violation of principles of natural justice and fundamental rights guaranteed under Constitution of India and consequently set aside the Notice R.C.No.23/2021, dt.21.02.2023 issued by the 6th respondent 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 pleased to direct the respondents not to demolish the structures in respect of the property of the petitioners building an extent of 351-256 square meters in R.S. No.67/1 situated at Bhimadole Village & Mandal, East Godavari District, pending disposal of the main Writ Petition and pass Counsel for the Petitioner(S): 1. E V V S RAVI KUMAR Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. Yarraguntla.Koteswara Rao,Standing Counsel For Zilla Praja Parishads,Mandal Praja Parishads and Gra 2. GP FOR PANCHAYAT RAJ RURAL DEV 3 The Court made the following order: Impugning the notice vide R.C.No.23 of 2021, dated 21.02.2023, issued by the 6th respondent, the present writ petition is filed. 2. Heard Sri Ramji, learned counsel representing Sri E.V.V.S. Ravi Kumar, learned counsel for the petitioners, Sri Y. Koteswara Rao, learned Standing Counsel for Gram Panchayat and Ms. Naga Chandrika, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Panchayat Raj. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioners, while reiterating the contents of the affidavit, submitted that the petitioners are the absolute owners and possessors and enjoyers of the subject property, having purchased under registered sale deed dated 30.11.2009 and 28.02.2009 respectively, and that there are no complaints/disputes in that regard. The petitioners constructed a (G+2) building by obtaining a building permission from the 6th respondent-Gram Panchayat on 08.11.2020. Subsequently, the petitioners raised additional two floors and thereafter, the 6th respondent issued provisional notices, to which the petitioners submitted reply on various dates. However, there is no response from the authority. While so, the 6th respondent issued a notice dated 21.02.2023 directing the petitioners to remove the 4 unauthorized structures in three days. He further contended that fixing such short time is not acceptable under law and if the said order is allowed to subsist, it would affect the rights of the petitioner. As such, prayed to pass appropriate orders protecting the interest of the petitioner. 5. Learned Standing Counsel for Gram Panchayat, on instructions, submitted that as the petitioners have proceeded with the constructions without any approved plan, the impugned orders dated 21.02.2023 has been issued directing the petitioners to remove the constructions. He fairly contended that, the authorities ought to have given sufficient time to the petitioners. If this Court is inclined to interfere, a liberty may be given to the petitioners to give explanation by fixing some time. After filing such explanation, the authority would consider and pass orders on the same in accordance with law. 6. Perused the record and considered the submissions made by both the parties. 7. It is not in dispute that the petitioners constructed a (G+4) building. But, they have obtained permission only for (G+2). It is the contention of the petitioners that pursuant to issuance of provisional order, petitioners submitted explanation on various 5 dates; however, the respondent authorities without passing any orders thereon, issued impugned notice dated 21.02.2023 directing the petitioners to remove the structures in three days. A perusal of the impugned notice dated 21.02.2023 would indicate that the authorities had given only three (03) days time to the petitioners to remove the structures. The authorities had not granted reasonable time to the petitioners to remove the structures. However, now the petitioner has an intention to submit explanation and the authorities have an intention to receive the same, there is no purpose in keeping the writ petition pending inviting counter. As such, this Court, instead of going into the merits of the case, is inclined to dispose of the writ petition by passing the following order: (i) The petitioners are at liberty to submit their explanation within two (02) weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order by treating the impugned notice dated 21.02.2023 as a show-cause notice. (ii) On such explanation, the authority concerned shall consider and pass reasoned order by providing an 6 opportunity of being heard to the petitioners as expeditiously as possible. (iii) Till such exercise, the respondent authorities are directed not to take any coercive steps. 7. Accordingly, the Writ Petition is disposed of. No costs. As a sequel thereto, interlocutory applications pending, if any in the Writ Petition, shall also stand closed. ____________________________ JUSTICE RAVI CHEEMALAPATI Date: 05.01.2026 ANS 7 393 THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE RAVI CHEEMALAPATI WRIT PETITION NO: 5438/2023 Date: 05.01.2026 ANS