APHC010710252025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3332] FRIDAY,THE SECOND DAY OF JANUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE RAVI CHEEMALAPATI WRIT PETITION NO: 36627/2025 Between: 1. MERUGU SUBBA RAO,, S/O. SANJEEVA RAO, AGED 58 YEARS, OCC BUSINESS, R/O. D.NO.4-89 AND 90, 9TH WARD, MANTADA VILLAGE, PAMIDIMUKKALA MANDAL, KRISHNA DISTRICT, PIN CODE - 506103. ...PETITIONER AND 1. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, , REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, PANCHAYAT RAJ AND RURAL DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT, VELAGAPUDI, AMARAVATI, GUNTUR DISTRICT PIN CODE - 522237. 2. THE COMMISSIONER PANCHAYAT RAJ AND RURAL DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT, O/O. FJC8 PLUS P7G, NH-16 SERVICE ROAD, TADEPALLI, GUNTUR DISTRICT, PIN CODE-522501. 3. THE ANDHRA PRADESH CAPITAL REGIONAL DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY AP CRDA, REP. BY ITS COMMISSIONER, VIJAYAWADA, NTR DISTRICT- 2 520001. 4. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR PANCHAYAT WING, KRISHNA DISTRICT AT MACHILIPATNAM - 521001. 5. THE DISTRICT PANCHAYAT OFFICER, KRISHNA DISTRICT AT MACHILIPATNAM PIN CODE-521001. 6. THE DIVISIONAL PANCHAYAT OFFICER, GUDIVADA, KRISHNA DISTRICT-521301. 7. THE TAHSILDAR, , PAMIDIMUKKALA MANDAL KRISHNA DISTRICT - 521250. 8. THE MANTADA GRAMA PANCHAYAT, , REP. BY ITS EXECUTIVE AUTHORITY-CUM-PANCHAYAT SECRETARY, PAMIDIMUKKALA MANDAL, KRISHNA DISTRICT, PIN CODE - 506103. ...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 provisional order, dated 14.08.2025 in Roc.No.54/2024 and subsequent confirming order, dated 01.11.2025 passed by the 8th Respondent and pursuant action of 8th Respondent in contemplating to demolish Petitioners G plus 4 residential building situated in extent of 340.75 Sq. yards in Sy. No.123/2 plus enclosed 114.25 Sq. yards in R.S. No. 123/IB of Mantada Village, Pamidimukkala Mandal, Krishna District, pending Application in Building Penalization Scheme (BPS)-2025 vide Application No. BPS2025/KRI/CRDA/ PAMI/MANT/006183, dated 17.12.2025 before the 3rd Respondent, as illegal, irregular, irrational, violative of principles natural justice, doctrine of promissory estoppel and offends Articles 14, 21 and 300-A of the Constitution of India and 3 consequently direct the Respondents particularly the Respondent not to interfere in any manner with Petitioners peaceful possession and enjoyment of said property nor demolish any portion thereof 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 may be pleased to suspend the operation of provisional order, dated 14.08.2025 in Roc. No.54/2024 and subsequent confirming order, dated 01.11.2025 passed by the 8**^ Respondent and consequently direct the Respondents particularly 8**^ Respondent not to interfere in any manner with Petitioner’s peaceful possession and enjoyment of his residential building situated in extent of 340.75 Sq. yards in Sy. No.123/2 plus enclosed 114.25 Sq. yards in R.S. No.123/IB of Mantada Village, Pamidimukkala Mandal, Krishna District, pending disposal of the main Writ Petition and pass such Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. SITA RAM CHAPARLA Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. GP FOR PANCHAYAT RAJ RURAL DEV The Court made the following order: Challenging the highhanded action of the respondent authorities in trying to interfere with and demolish the petitioner’s (G+IV) residential building, situated in an extent of 340 Sq.yards in Sy.No.123/2 along with an enclosed extent of 114.25 Sq.yards 4 in R.S.No.123/1B of Mantada Village, Pamidimukkala Mandal, Krishna District, the present writ petition is filed. 2. Heard Sri Sita Rama Chaparla, learned counsel for the petitioner, Sri Y. Koteshwara Rao, learned Standing Counsel for Gram Panchayat, and Ms. Naga Chandrika, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Panchayat Raj. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner, in elaboration to what has been stated in the affidavit, contended that the petitioner is the absolute owner and possessor and enjoyer of the subject property, having succeeded the same through his mother, and that there are no complaints/disputes in that regard. The petitioner constructed a (G+2) residential building by obtaining a building permission from the 8th respondent-Gram Panchayat vide resolution dated 10.10.2009. Subsequently, the petitioner raised additional two floors and made an application for approval of revised plan before the Gram Panchayat. However, as no orders have been passed within the stipulated period, the petitioner invoked the ‘deemed approval’ provision under G.O.Ms.No.67, dated 26.02.2002, and proceeded with the construction. While so, the 8th respondent issued a notice dated 5 07.09.2020 directing the petitioner to remove the unauthorized structures. Questioning the said notice, the petitioner filed W.P.No.17079 of 2020 and this Court, by order dated 23.09.2020, disposed of the said writ petition directing the authorities to pass appropriate orders after giving notice to the petitioner and after hearing him. Till such time, the respondents directed not to take any coercive steps against the petitioner. He further submitted that based on a complaint made by one Pandalaneni Ramana Rajkumar before the Hon'ble Lokayukta, alleging that the petitioner has occupied/encroached upon the Panchayat land, the 5th respondent-District Panchayat Officer, by proceedings dated 15.06.2023, directed the 8th respondent to demolish the construction with the help of police and revenue officials. Consequently, the 8th respondent issued notice dated 27.06.2023 ordering demolition by fixing seven days' time. In response, the petitioner submitted explanation dated 01.07.2023, but no inquiry has been conducted. In those circumstances, questioning the proceedings of the 5th respondent the petitioner once again filed W.P.No.17285 of 2023, wherein this Court, by order dated 27.3.2023, set aside the impugned 6 proceedings and thereby directed the authorities to follow due process of law. In the meantime, the regularization scheme came into force and thereby the 8th respondent issued provisional orders dated 14.08.2025 directing the petitioner to demolish the unauthorized construction and calling upon him to show cause within 7 days as to why the confirmation orders should not be passed, which is impugned in the present writ petition. He further contended that on one hand, the authorities have directed to demolish the structure and on the other hand, they are asking show cause as to why final orders should not be passed. Without hearing the petitioner and without considering the earlier explanation submitted by the petitioner, giving such provisional order is wholly unsustainable and contrary to law. In fact, the authorities are predetermined and contemplated to take steps against the petitioner's structures. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner further contended that pursuant to the provisional order, another order dated 01.11.2025 was passed confirming the demolition. The authority concerned failed to consider the explanation submitted by the petitioner properly and did not afford an opportunity of personal hearing as 7 mandated under Rule 4 of G.O.Ms.No.188, dated 21.07.2011. It was submitted that a notice dated 17.11.2025 was issued by the respondent Panchayat asking the petitioner to make an application for regularization. Pursuantly, the petitioner made an application for regularization and the same is pending consideration. In view of the facts and circumstances of the case, if the said order is allowed to subsist, it would affect the rights of the petitioner and the purpose of filing regularization application would also be defeated. As such, prayed to pass appropriate orders protecting the interest of the petitioner. 5. Learned Standing Counsel for Gram Panchayat, on instructions, contended that the petitioner’s application for regularization is pending consideration. In so far as the impugned orders dated 14.08.2025 and 01.11.2025 are concerned, the authorities have rightly passed orders by duly taking into consideration the explanation submitted by the petitioner. He further contended that issuance of notice and inviting explanation itself constitutes following the principles of natural justice, and the petitioner cannot say that the respondent authorities have violated the principles of natural justice. As such, there is no 8 violation of principles of natural justice, as alleged by the petitioner. However, the authority has not taken any steps pending consideration of the petitioner’s application. As such, prayed to dismiss the writ petition. 6. Perused the record and considered the submissions made by the respective parties. 7. It is not in dispute that the petitioner constructed a (G+4) residential building. According to the petitioner, he obtained permission for (G+2) and filed a revised plan for construction of (G+4) building. After statutory period, as no orders have been passed on the said application (revised plan), the petitioner proceeded with the construction under the deemed approval provision. This Court in W.P.No.17079 of 2020 directed the authorities to follow due process of law before taking any coercive steps against the petitioner's construction. Admittedly, a notice was issued by the respondent Gram Panchayat asking the petitioner to submit explanation. In the very said notice, the authorities also directed the petitioner to remove the structures. On one hand, the respondent authorities are asking to submit explanation and on other hand, they are asking the petitioner to 9 remove the structures. Despite repeated directions from this Court, the authorities issuing notices in such a manner is deplorable. A perusal of the orders impugned dated 14.8.2025 and dated 01.11.2025, would indicate that no opportunity of being heard was provided nor given any cogent reasons discarding the petitioner explanation. Rule 4 of G.O.Ms.No.188, dated 21.07.2011, is relevant and reads as follows: “4. EVICTION OF ENCROACHMENTS: (i) Where it is brought to the notice that any property of the Panchayat is under occupation of any persons the Executive authority (Panchayat Secretary) shall serve a notice to the party concerned and give a brief hearing before proceeding for eviction. (ii) Suitable orders shall be passed by the Executive authority (Panchayat Secretary) before actual eviction takes place. (iii) The Divisional Panchayat Officer will conduct a monthly review of these cases for protecting Gram Panchayat properties in his jurisdiction through monitoring the process of eviction. He will also give periodical reports to District Panchayat Officer, who will review the cases once in two months. (iv)The Executive authority (Panchayat Secretary) may take necessary assistance from the police as per section 139 of the Andhra Pradesh Panchayat Raj Act’1994. (v) The evicted property of the Gram Panchayat shall be protected by making fencing or by constructing a compound wall depending on the value of the property and by displaying a notice board. (vi) A permanent register on encroachment of Panchayat properties shall be maintained in all Gram Panchayats and the 10 same will be validated in the Gram Sabha and Gram Panchayat meetings at least twice in a year. (vii) Aggrieved parties may file representations to the Executive authority (Panchayat Secretary) concerned by marking a copy to the Divisional Panchayat Officer. (viii) The petitions filed by the aggrieved parties will be monitored and disposed of by the Divisional Panchayat Officer / District Panchayat Officer.” 8. A perusal of the said rule clearly indicates that an opportunity of brief hearing should be provided to the parties before taking any steps in eviction of encroachments. The respondent authorities are alleging that the petitioner has encroached upon the Panchayat land; however, no clear material has been placed on record to show that a survey has been conducted to identify the extents of land that the petitioner has encroached upon. The manner in which the respondent authorities have proceeded against the petitioner is wholly unsustainable and in clear violation of the principles of audi alteram partem and accordingly, the orders impugned are liable to be set aside. In view of the same, this Court is inclined to dispose of the writ petition with the following direction: 11 (i) The provisional order dated 14.08.2025 in Roc.No.54/2024 and the confirmation order dated 01.11.2025, issued by the 8th respondent, are hereby set aside and the matter is remitted back to the authorities concerned for further adjudication. (ii) The Gram Panchayat shall get the subject place surveyed through a surveyor to identify the extents of encroachment made by the petitioner. After identifying the encroachments, if any, the authority concerned shall issue a notice duly informing the extent of encroachment made by the petitioner, inviting explanation by giving sufficient time. (iii) The petitioner is at liberty to submit explanation to such notice issued, if any by the Gram Panchayat, by submitting all the relevant documents in support of the claim. (iv) On such submission of explanation, if any, the Gram Panchayat shall issue appropriate notice fixing time & date for opportunity of personal hearing as contemplated under Rule 4 of G.O.Ms.No.188, dated 21.11.2011, and pass a reasoned order. 12 (v) The respondent authorities also shall take into consideration the regularization petition in accordance with law. Till such exercise is completed the respondent authorities are directed not to take any coercive steps against the petitioner’s building. 10. With the above observations, the Writ Petition is disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs. As a sequel thereto, interlocutory applications pending, if any in the Writ Petition, shall also stand closed. ____________________________ JUSTICE RAVI CHEEMALAPATI Date: 02.01.2026 ANS 13 302 THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE RAVI CHEEMALAPATI WRIT PETITION NO: 36627/2025 Date: 02.01.2026 ANS