APHC010227212026 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3331] TUESDAY, THE FIFTH DAY OF MAY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE SUBBA REDDY SATTI WRIT PETITION NO: 11877/2026 Between: 1. REDDY NARAYANA SWAMY, , S/O VENKAT RAO, AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS. OCCUPATION CULTIVATION, R/O G KOTHAPALLI VILLAGE, DWARAKA TIRUMALA MANDAL, ELURU DISTRICT, A.P. 2. REDDY SRI KRISHNA BALAJI,, S/O VENKAT RAO, AGED ABOUT 43 YEARS. OCCUPATION CULTIVATION, R/O G KOTHAPALLI VILLAGE, DWARAKA TIRUMALA MANDAL, ELURU DISTRICT, A.P. ...PETITIONER(S) AND 1. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP. BY SPECIAL CHIEF SECRETARY, PANCHAYAT RAJ AND RURAL DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT, A.P. SECRETARIAT, VELAGAPUDI, AMARAVATI, A.P. 2. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, ELURU, ELURU DISTRICT, A.P. 3. THE DISTRICT PANCHAYAT OFFICER, ELURU, ELURU DISTRICT, A.P. 4. THETAHSILDAR, DWARAKA TIRUMALA MANDAL, ELURU DISTRICT-534 426. 5. THE PANCHAYAT SECRETARY, GRAM PANCHAYAT, G. KOTHAPALLI, DWARAKA TIRUMALA MANDAL, ELURU DISTRICT- 534 426. A.P. ...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 Writ or Order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus, declaring the impugned notice vide Rc.No.02/2026/GP, dated 16.04.2026 issued by the 5th respondent to the petitioners to demolish the approved new construction of their RCC building in R.S.No.77 of G.Kothapalli village and Panchayat alleged to be encroached of 5 yards of land in R.S.No.104 of G.Kothapalli Village, Dwaraka Tirumala Mandal, Eluru District, which is quite illegal, arbitrary and unjust and also violating the Andhra Pradesh Panchayat Raj Act, 1994 and also violation of Article, 14, 19, 21 and 300-A of the Constitution of India and quash the impugned notice and consequently to direct the respondents 2 to 5 not to ever interfere with the petitioners' peaceful possession and enjoyment of the newly constructed RCC building of the petitioners is situated in survey No.77 of G.Kothapalli village, Dwaraka Tirumala Mandal Eluru District and to consider the written explanation dated 20.04. 2026 of the petitioners to the 5th respondent on the impugned notice dated 16.04.2026 and to 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 suspend the impugned notice vide Rc.No.02/2026/GP, dated 16.04.2026 issued by 5th respondent to the petitioners to demolish the new construction of their RCC building alleged to be encroached of 5 yards of land in R.S.No.104 of G.Kothapalli Village, Dwaraka Tirumala Mandal, Eluru District, till disposal of the writ petition and to pass Counsel for the Petitioner(S): 1. K J V N PUNDAREEKAKSHUDU Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. GP FOR PANCHAYAT RAJ RURAL DEV 2. GP FOR REVENUE The Court made the following order: Heard Sri K.Srinivas, learned counsel for the petitioners, Sri P.Rajesh Kumar, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Panchayat Raj and Rural Development for the respondents 1 and 3, Ms. Usha, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue for the respondents 2 and 4, and Sri Chaitanya, learned counsel representing Sri Y.Koteswara Rao, learned Standing counsel for the 5th respondent. 2. Impugning the notice issued by the Panchayat Secretary of the 5th respondent vide R.C.No.02/2026/GP dated 16.04.2026 (Ex.P1), the petitioners filed the above writ petition. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioners would submit that the petitioners’ father purchased a site admeasuring 139.88 Square Yards about six decades ago and constructed a tiled house therein. The Gram Panchayat initially assigned house No.2-28, which was subsequently changed to house No.2-37. The taxes are being paid regularly. No document was initially obtained from the vendor; later, the vendor’s son executed a registered sale deed dated 29.08.2022, registered on 01.09.2022 as Document No.6407/2022. The petitioners applied to the Gram Panchayat for the grant of building permission. The 5th respondent issued permission vide B.A.No.1/2026 dated 03.01.2026 (Ex.P6). 4. Be that as it may, one Sri R.Stayanaryana, filed W.P.No.1294 of 2026, stating that the PGRS complaint made by him, vis-à-vis, encroachment by the petitioners herein regarding the construction of a shopping complex was not attended to. An interim order was passed therein. 5. Without conducting any inquiry, the notice vide R.C.No.02/2026/GP dated 16.04.2026 (Ex.P1) was issued, alleging that the petitioners had encroached upon the cart track poramboku land. Learned counsel for the petitioners would submit that the notice vide R.C.No.02/2026/GP dated 16.04.2026 (Ex.P1) suffers from a violation of the Principles of Natural Justice. He also would submit that neither a survey was conducted nor a report was furnished to the petitioners. 6. Sri Chaitanya, learned counsel representing Sri Y.Koteswara Rao, learned Standing counsel for the 5th respondent, submitted the written instructions of the Panchayat Secretary. The written instructions neither indicate furnishing a copy of the survey report nor a show-cause notice. 7. Thus, a perusal of the notice Ex.P1, though it is styled as a notice, however, it is in the form of an order. The third reference in the notice refers to the report of the Mandal Surveyor, Dwaraka Tirumala, dated 10.04.2026. As seen from the notice, the report was not furnished to the petitioners, enabling them to submit a proper explanation. In the notice, it was simply mentioned that the petitioners encroached upon an extent of 5 yards and made construction on the cart track poramboke in Sy.No.104. 8. Even as per the procedure prescribed in G.O.Ms.No.188 dated 21.07.2011, the authority shall issue a show cause notice, calling upon the recipient to submit an explanation, opportunity of hearing and thereafter to pass a reasoned order. However, the notice vide R.C.No.02/2026/GP dated 16.04.2026 (Ex.P1) does not indicate that such a procedure was adopted. 9. Given the facts and circumstances of the case, inviting a counter and keeping the writ petition may not serve any purpose, and 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 impugned vide R.C.No.02/2026/GP dated 16.04.2026 (Ex.P1) is hereby set aside. ii) The 5th respondent – Gram Panchayat shall issue a fresh notice, by annexing a copy of the survey report within two weeks. iii) After receipt of the notice, the petitioners shall submit a proper explanation by annexing all the relevant documents within two weeks thereafter. iv) Upon receipt of the explanation from the petitioners, the Panchayat Secretary of the 5th respondent shall conduct an inquiry by giving an opportunity of hearing to the petitioners, pass a reasoned order in accordance with law, and communicate the same to the petitioners. v) Till a reasoned order is passed, the Panchayat Secretary of the 5th respondent shall not take any coercive steps regarding the structure involved in the notice vide R.C.No.02/2026/GP dated 16.04.2026 (Ex.P1). vi) The Panchayat Secretary to 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. vii) There shall be no order as to costs. As a sequel, pending miscellaneous petitions, if any, shall stand closed. ___________________________ JUSTICE SUBBA REDDY SATTI Date: 05.05.2026 SNI 201 THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE SUBBA REDDY SATTI WRIT PETITION NO: 11877 OF 2026 Date: 05.05.2026 SNI