APHC010231192026 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3331] THURSDAY, THE SEVENTH DAY OF MAY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE SUBBA REDDY SATTI WRIT PETITION NO: 11950/2026 Between: 1. U NAGAVARDHAN REDDY, AGED 35 YRS S/O U. KUMAR REDDY, R/O SREEDHARAGATTA (V), BOMMANAHALMANDAL,ANANTAPURDISTRICT. ...PETITIONER AND 1. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, PANCHAYAT RAJ RURAL DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT BUILDINGS, VELAGAPUDI, GUNTUR DISTRICT, 2.8 2. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR PANCHAYATS, ANANTAPUR DISTRICT, ANANTAPUR. 3. THE TAHSILDAR, BOMMANAHAL MANDAL, ANANTAPUR DISTRICT, JTSBOL 4. THE MANDAL PARISHAD DEVELOPMENT OFFICER, BOMMANAHAL MANDAL, ANANTAPUR DISTRICT, 5. THE PANCHAYAT SECRETARY, SREEDHARGATTA GRAMA PANCHAYAT, SREEDHARGATTA (V), BOMMANAHAL MANDAL, ANANTAPUR DISTRICT. 6. CHANDRA SEKAHAR REDDY, S/O LATE U. SHANKAR REDDY,AGED ABOUT 57 YEARS, R/O 1-81-3, SREEDHARAGHATTA(V), BOMMANAHAL MANDAL, ANANTAPUR 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 to pass an order or orders or direction more particularly one in the nature of a writ of mandamus declaring the action of the 5th of the Respondent in issuing orders styled as notice (undated received on 21.04.2026) for demolition of the house of the petitioner situated in Sreedharaghatta village, Bommnahal Mandal, Anantapuramu District arbitrary and illegal and violative of principles of natural justice and contrary to the orders passed by the Honble High Court in W.P.No.30517 of 2024 dated 05.01.2026, besides violation of petitioners right guaranteed under Article 14, 21 and 300A of the Constitution of India and consequently set aside the same and 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 stay the orders of the 5th respondent styled as notice (undated received on 21.04.2026) for demolition of the house of the petitioner situated in Sreedharaghatta village, Bommnahal Mandal, Anantapuramu District pending disposal of the writ petition and to pass Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. HARISH KUMAR RASINENI Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. KOTI REDDY IDAMAKANTI 2. The Court made the following order: Heard Sri Harish Kumar Rasineni, learned counsel for the petitioner, Sri P.Rajesh Kumar, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Panchayat Raj and Rural Development for the respondents 1 and 2, Ms. Usha, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue for the 3rd respondent, Ms. Kavitha, learned counsel representing Sri M.Sudhir, learned Standing counsel for the respondents 4 and 5, and Sri Koti Reddy Idamakanti, learned counsel for the 6th respondent. 2. Assailing the notice dated 05.04.2026 (Ex.P1) issued by the Panchayat Secretary of the 5th respondent, the petitioner filed the above writ petition. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner is the absolute owner and possessor of a house site admeasuring Ac.0.06 cents in Sy.No.174 of Sreedharagatta Village, Bommanahal Mandal, Anantapur District. The plot originally belonged to Smt. Sunkamma w/o Hanumanthappa and Smt. Manikyamma w/o Thippeswamy. The Tahsildar, Bommanahal Mandal, issued possession certificates. Thereafter, the petitioner entered into an agreement of sale dated 18.10.2019. 4. The 6th respondent made a complaint to the 2nd respondent regarding the construction of a house by the petitioner and thereafter, filed W.P.No.30517 of 2024 along with some other persons. The writ petition was disposed of on 05.01.2026. However, without adhering to the directions in the writ petition, Ex.P1 notice was issued. Learned counsel for the petitioner would further submit that neither a survey was conducted nor a report was furnished to the petitioner. 5. Ms. Kavitha, learned counsel representing Sri M.Sudhir, learned Standing counsel for the respondents 4 and 5, on instructions of the Panchayat Secretary, would submit that the Tahsildar conducted a survey and forwarded the report dated 02.04.2026 to the Gram Panchayat. Thereafter, Ex.P1 notice was issued. 6. Ms. Usha, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue, submitted the written instructions of the Tahsildar – 3rd respondent. 7. As seen from the written instructions, notices were issued to the petitioner and the adjacent farmers to attend the survey, and, in fact, the petitioner and others attended the survey conducted on 02.04.2026. After surveying Sy.No.174, it was observed that the petitioner had constructed an RCC building in Sy.No.174 with a measurement of 13.5 meters in the North- South direction and 8.5 meters in the East-West direction. 8. Sri Koti Reddy Idamakanti, learned counsel for the 6th respondent, would submit that the petitioner constructed the structure without getting permission from the Gram Panchayat and by encroaching upon a public place. 9. The writ petition was initially listed on 27.04.2026 and adjourned at the request of the learned Assistant Government Pleader and learned Standing counsel to produce the survey report. Thereafter, the writ petition was listed on 06.05.2026 and adjourned at the request of the learned Standing counsel. Page 4 of 6 10. Today, when the matter is taken up for consideration, as noted supra, the learned Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue submitted the written instructions of the Tahsildar. However, except for stating that a survey was conducted on 02.04.2026, the survey report was not annexed. 11. A perusal of Ex.P1 does not indicate furnishing a copy of the survey report dated 02.04.2026 to the petitioner, enabling the petitioner to submit a proper explanation. No doubt, in the notice Ex.P1, it was mentioned that the petitioner encroached upon an extent of 2.5 cents. However, unless and until the survey report is furnished to the petitioner, the petitioner may not be in a position to give a proper explanation. 12. While disposing of W.P.No.30517 of 2024, the Coordinate Bench of this Court observed as follows: “In view of the above, without going into merits of the matter, this writ petition is disposed of, directing respondent No.2 – District Collector to give directions to the Tahsildar concerned to get the subject land surveyed to identify as to whether there is encroachment of land classified as tank and road as alleged by the petitioner. If it is found that there is encroachment, the same shall be forwarded to the concerned Gram Panchayat and upon such the Gram Panchayat shall issue notices seeking explanation and afford and opportunity of being heard to respondent No.5 and pass a reasoned order and take steps accordingly. If there are no encroachments, the same shall be informed to the petitioner in writing. The entire exercise shall be completed within a period of three (03) months.” 13. Thus, a perusal of Ex.P1 does not indicate issuance of any show cause notice calling upon the petitioner to submit an explanation. On this ground also, Ex.P1 is liable to be set aside. 14. Given the facts and circumstances of the case, inviting a counter and keeping the writ petition may not serve any purpose. Hence, 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 dated 05.04.2026 (Ex.P1) issued by the Panchayat Secretary of the 5th respondent is hereby set aside. ii) The Panchayat Secretary of the 5th respondent shall issue a fresh notice to the petitioner by annexing the survey report dated 02.04.2026 to the petitioner, enabling the petitioner to submit a proper explanation within fifteen (15) days from today. iii) After receipt of the notice, the petitioner shall submit a proper explanation by annexing all the relevant documents within fifteen (15) days thereafter. iv) Upon receipt of the explanation from the petitioner, the Panchayat Secretary of the 5th respondent shall conduct an inquiry by giving an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner, the 6th respondent and other interested parties, pass a reasoned order in accordance with law, and communicate the same. v) The Panchayat Secretary of the 5th respondent shall complete the entire exercise within a period of two (02) months from the date of receipt of a copy of the order. vi) There shall be no order as to costs. As a sequel, pending miscellaneous petitions, if any, shall stand closed. ___________________________ JUSTICE SUBBA REDDY SATTI Date: 07.05.2026 SNI 144 THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE SUBBA REDDY SATTI WRIT PETITION NO: 11950 OF 2026 Date: 07.05.2026 SNI