APHC010581302024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH MONDAY,THE FIFTH DAY OF JANUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE RAVI CHEEMALAPATI WRIT PETITION NO: 30517/2024 Between: 1. U. CHANDRA SEKHAR REDDY,,, S/O. LATE U. SHANKAR REDDY, AGED ABOUT 57 YEARS. R/O. 1 (VILLAGE), BOMMANAHAL MANDAL, ANANTAPUR DISTRICT. 2. UPPARA RAMAKRISHNA,, S/O. LATE U. RUDRANNA., AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS., R/O. 7B, BOMMANAHAL MANDAL., ANANTAPUR DISTRICT. 3. U. RAVICHANDRA.,, S./O. LATE VENKATESH., AGED ABOUT 29 YEARS., R/O. 78, SREEDHARGATTA. (VILLAGE), BOMMANAHAL MANDAL., ANANTAPUR DISTRICT. 4. R.C. VENKATA REDDY.,, S/O. R. SIDDA RE YEARS., R/O. SREEDHARGATTA. (VILLAGE), BOMMANAHAL MANDAL., ANANTAPUR DISTRICT. 1. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, , REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY., PANCHAYAT RAJ AND RURAL DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT., SECRETARI GUNTUR DISTRICT. 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) MONDAY,THE FIFTH DAY OF JANUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE RAVI CHEEMALAPATI WRIT PETITION NO: 30517/2024 U. CHANDRA SEKHAR REDDY,,, S/O. LATE U. SHANKAR REDDY, AGED ABOUT 57 YEARS. R/O. 1-81-3, SREEDHARAGHATTA (VILLAGE), BOMMANAHAL MANDAL, ANANTAPUR DISTRICT. UPPARA RAMAKRISHNA,, S/O. LATE U. RUDRANNA., AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS., R/O. 7B, SREEDHARGATTA. (VILLAGE), BOMMANAHAL MANDAL., ANANTAPUR DISTRICT. U. RAVICHANDRA.,, S./O. LATE VENKATESH., AGED ABOUT 29 YEARS., R/O. 78, SREEDHARGATTA. (VILLAGE), BOMMANAHAL MANDAL., ANANTAPUR DISTRICT. R.C. VENKATA REDDY.,, S/O. R. SIDDA REDDY., AGED ABOUT 48 YEARS., R/O. SREEDHARGATTA. (VILLAGE), BOMMANAHAL MANDAL., ANANTAPUR DISTRICT. ...PETITIONER(S) AND THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, , REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY., PANCHAYAT RAJ AND RURAL DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT., SECRETARIAT BUILDINGS., VELAGAPUDI., GUNTUR DISTRICT. RC,J W.P.No.30517 of 2024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH [3332] THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE RAVI CHEEMALAPATI U. CHANDRA SEKHAR REDDY,,, S/O. LATE U. SHANKAR REDDY, 3, SREEDHARAGHATTA (VILLAGE), BOMMANAHAL MANDAL, ANANTAPUR DISTRICT. UPPARA RAMAKRISHNA,, S/O. LATE U. RUDRANNA., AGED SREEDHARGATTA. (VILLAGE), U. RAVICHANDRA.,, S./O. LATE VENKATESH., AGED ABOUT 29 YEARS., R/O. 78, SREEDHARGATTA. (VILLAGE), BOMMANAHAL DDY., AGED ABOUT 48 YEARS., R/O. SREEDHARGATTA. (VILLAGE), BOMMANAHAL ...PETITIONER(S) THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, , REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY., PANCHAYAT RAJ AND RURAL DEVELOPMENT AT BUILDINGS., VELAGAPUDI., RC,J W.P.No.30517 of 2024 2 2. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR PANCHAYATS, ANANTAPUR DISTRICT., ANANTAPUR. 3. THE MANDAL PARISHAD DEVELOPMENT OFFICER, BOMMANAHAL MANDAL ANANTAPUR.DISTRICT. 4. SREEDHARGATTA GRAMA PANCHAYAT, SREEDHARGATTA (V) BOMMANAHAL MANDAL., ANANTAPUR DISTRICT. REP. BY ITS PANCHAYAT SECRETARY. 5. U NAGAVARDHAN REDDY, S/O. U. KUMAR REDDY AGED ABOUT 35 YEARS SREEDHARGATTA (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 tomay be pleased to issue a writ order or direction more particularly one in the nature of writ of mandamus declaring the action of the respondents in not passing any orders on the notices issued by the 4th respondent herein under the provisions of A.P.Panchayat Raj Act to the 5th respondent herein and preventing the 5th respondent in making constructions in the tank and road situated at Sy.Nos. 386-1,2,3 and in Sy.No. 174 of Sreedhargatta village, Bommanahal Mandal, Anantapur District which is notified and recorded as tank and road respectively as arbitrary, illegal, improper and incorrect and consequently direct the respondents 2 to 4 herein to pass appropriate orders on the notices issued by the 4th respondent herein under the provisions of A.P.Panchayat Raj Act to the 5th respondent herein and prevent the 5th respondent herein from making constructions in the tank and road situated at Sy.Nos. 386-1,2,3 and in Sy.No. 174 of Sreedhargatta village, Bommanahal Mandal, Anantapur District which is notified and recorded as tank and road respectively and pass such IA NO: 1 OF 2024 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 RC,J W.P.No.30517 of 2024 3 may be pleased to direct the direct the respondents 2 to 4 herein to pass appropriate orders on the notices issued by the 4th respondent herein under the provisions of A.P.Panchayat Raj Act to the 5th respondent herein and prevent the respondent herein from making constructions in the tank and road situated at Sy.Nos. 386-1,2,3 and in Sy.No. 174 of Sreedhargatta village, Bommanahal Mandal, Anantapur which is notified and recorded as tank and road respectively pending disposal of the writ petition and pass such IA NO: 1 OF 2025 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 receive the counter affidavit filed to the Writ Petition of the petitioners on record by allowing the leave petition in the above writ petition and may pass Counsel for the Petitioner(S): 1. V V N NARASIMHAM Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. GP FOR PANCHAYAT RAJ RURAL DEV 2. HARISH KUMAR RASINENI 3. GP FOR PANCHAYAT RAJ RURAL DEV 4. Mattegunta.Sudhir,Standing Counsel For Z.P.Ps,M.P.Ps,Gram Panchayats The Court made the following: RC,J W.P.No.30517 of 2024 4 ORDER The grievance of the petitioners is that the respondent no.4 is not passing any orders on the notice issued to respondent no.5 and not preventing the respondent no.5 from making constructions in the tank and road situated at Survey Nos.386-1,2,3 and Survey No.174 of Sreedhargatta Village, Bommanahal Mandal, Anantapur District. 2. Heard Sri V.V.N.Narasimham, learned counsel for the petitioners, Sri M.Sudhir, learned Standing Counsel for Gram Panchayat, Ms.Naga Chandrika, learned Assistant Governemnt Pleader for Panchayat Raj and Sri Harish Kumar Rasineni, learned counsel for respondent no.5. 3. Sri V.V.N.Narasimham, learned counsel, while reiterating the contents of the writ affidavit, would contend that on the complaint made by the petitioners to the authorities bringing to their notice about the construction of house being made by respondent no.5 by occupying the tank and the road and thereupon respondent no.4 issued notice on 08.08.2024 to respondent no.5 to furnish approved plan issued by Gram Panchayat and other documents. He would further contend that as respondent no.5 did not respond to the notice, the respondent no.4 again issued another notice dated 02.09.2024 directing respondent no.5 to submit documents and stop construction activity, for which also respondent no.5 did not respond and RC,J W.P.No.30517 of 2024 5 hence the respondent no.4 issued another notice dated 25.09.2024 and through respondent no.5 did not respond to the said notice too, the authorities are not passing any orders on the notices and not preventing the respondent no.5 from making constructions in the site classified as tank and road. Accordingly, prayed to direct the respondents to pass orders on the notices issued to respondent no.5 and prevent respondent no.5 from making constructions. 4. Sri M.Sudhir, learned Standing Counsel for Gram Panchayat, on counter, would contend that notices were issued to respondent no.5 to submit the permission and other relevant documents and though the respondent no.5 received the said notices did not submit any explanation and appropriate action would be initiated, if it is found that constructions are made in the land classified as tank and road. 5. On the other hand, Sri Harish Kumar Rasineni, learned counsel for respondent no.5 would submit that the petitioner, who is brother of respondent no.5, without obtaining any permission from Gram Panchayat got constructed the house and as there are disputes between the brothers, the petitioner only to wreck vengeance filed the writ petition. He would further contend that respondent no.5 submitted explanation to the notice requesting the authorities to conduct survey of land to ascertain as to whether there is RC,J W.P.No.30517 of 2024 6 any encroachment as alleged by the petitioner. That the writ petition is devoid of merit and is liable to be dismissed. 6. Perused the material available on record and considered the submissions made by learned counsel for the parties. 7. Inaction of the authorities in passing orders on the notices issued to respondent no.5 and preventing him from making construction in the land classified as tank and road is the grievance. Admittedly, the Gram panchayat issued notices to respondent no.5. According to gram panchayat no explanation was submitted by respondent no.5, which was denied by learned counsel for respondent no.5 and submitted that respondent no.5 submitted explanation requesting the authorities to conduct a survey to ascertain as to whether there is any encroachment as alleged by the petitioner. In case, the respondent no.5 failed to adhere to the directions given into the notice, the Gram Panchayat shall conduct survey to identity as to whether there was any encroachments, if so, the extent of the encroachment to take steps for removal of the encroachments. However, the Gram Panchayat failed to do its statutory duty. 8. 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 RC,J W.P.No.30517 of 2024 7 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 an opportunity of being head 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. There shall be no order as to costs. Pending miscellaneous petitions, if any, shall stand closed. ___________________________ JUSTICE RAVI CHEEMALAPATI DATED 5th DAY OF JANUARY, 2026. RR