1 APHC010153502026 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3332] TUESDAY, THE TWENTY FOURTH DAY OF MARCH TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE RAVI CHEEMALAPATI WRIT PETITION NO: 7985/2026 Between: 1. M Jansi Rani, W/o. Sankara Rao, Aged about 35 years, R/o. 02 ward, Kothavalasa, Parvathipuram Town and Mandal Vizianagaram District- 535501. ...PETITIONER AND 1. The State of Andhra Pradesh, rep. By its Principal Secretary Municipality Administration Department, Secretariat Buildings, Velagapudi, Guntur district-522238. 2. The Commissioner, Parvathipuram Municipality, Parvathipuram Town And Mandal, Vizianagaram District-535501. ...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 a writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of mandamus declaring the action of the 2nd respondent in issuing the impugned notice vide Roc. No. 1/2026 WPRS-03/G1, dt. 17.02.2026 in respect of the house site of the petitioner being an extent of Ac. 0.02 cents in flat no. 48 situated at Sy.No.198/13, 17, 18 and 19 at Parvathipuram Town and Mandal, Vizianagaram District is as illegal, arbitrary, violative article 14, 21 and 300-A of the Constitution of India, violation of principles of natural justice and also contrary to the provisions of A.P Municipality Act, 1965 and consequently set aside the same and pass 2 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 2nd respondent not to conduct demolish the structure existing in Ac. 0.02 cents in flat no. 48 situated at Sy.No.198/13, 17, 18 and 19 at Parvathipuram Town and Mandal, Vizianagaram District by suspending the impugned notice vide Roc. No. 1/2026 WPRS-03/G1, dt. 17.02.2026, pending disposal of the main writ petition, and pass Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. BONU RAMA SHANKAR RAO Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. GP MUNCIPAL ADMN AND URBAN DEV AP The Court made the following order: Challenging the proceedings vide Roc.No.1/2026/WPRS-03/G1 dated 17.02.2026 directing the petitioner to remove the encroachments within 3 days, without following the procedure contemplated under law, the present writ petition is filed. 2. Heard Sri B.Rama Shankara Rao, learned counsel for the petitioner and Smt Sireesha Rani Vallabhaneni, learned Standing counsel for respondent Municipality. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner in elaboration to what has been stated in the affidavit contended that, the petitioner was allotted the subject house site admeasuring Ac.0.02 cents in Flat No.48 situated at Sy.Nos.198/13,17,18 & 19 in Parvathipuram Town and mandal, Vizianagaram District, under YSR Housing Scheme, vide proceedings dated 02.12.2020 and since then, she has been in peaceful possession and enjoyment of the same. 3 He further submitted that, the 2nd respondent issued impugned notice dated 17.02.2026 without issuing any prior show cause notice seeking explanation and without providing an opportunity of being heard to the petitioner. He further submitted that, the impugned proceedings though styled as notice, virtually it is a direction given to the petitioner to remove the constructions in the subject land within three(03) days, failing which they would take steps against her. If the mandate in the said proceedings are allowed to materialize, the rights of the petitioner will be affected. As such, prayed to pass appropriate orders in that regard. 4. On the other hand, learned Standing counsel for respondents while justifying the impugned order contended that the petitioner is an encroacher, as such no indulgence need be shown on the petitioner. She fairly conceded that concerned authority ought to have issued a show-cause notice before issuing the impugned notice. In case, if this Court inclines to interfere with the said impugned notice/proceedings, liberty may be given to the concerned authority to take steps in accordance with law. 5. Perused the impugned notice/proceedings dated 17.02.2026. As rightly contended by the learned counsel for the petitioner, the impugned notice does not speak anything about prior issuance of any show-cause notice to the petitioner seeking her explanation. It is well settled that, even an encroacher is entitled for a reasonable notice. 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. 4 6. Therefore, in view of the above, issuing the impugned notice with such a direction, without issuing any prior show-cause notice and without providing an opportunity of being heard to the petitioner, is un-sustainable under law. As such, the impugned notice is ex-facie illegal, unsustainable and was issued in clear violation of principles of natural justice. In view of the above stated circumstances, there is no purpose in keeping this writ petition pending inviting counter. As such, this Court is inclined to set aside the impugned notice dated 17.02.2026, at the admission stage itself without inviting counter, since the respondents cannot improvise their case by filing the counter. 7. Accordingly, the Writ Petition is disposed of by setting aside the impugned notice dated 17.02.2026. However, this order does not preclude the concerned authority to take steps in accordance with law, by issuing proper show-cause notice inviting explanation and providing an opportunity of personal hearing and to pass a reasoned order and communicate the same to the concerned parties. Till completion of such exercise, the respondents are directed not to take any coercive steps against the petitioner. There shall be no order as to costs. Miscellaneous applications, pending if any, shall stand closed. ___________________________ JUSTICE RAVI CHEEMALAPATI BRS