APHC010722362025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3332] TUESDAY, THE SIXTH DAY OF JANUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE RAVI CHEEMALAPATI WRIT PETITION NO: 102/2026 Between: 1. JALLI PRABHAKAR, S/O. LATE. MUSALAIAH, AGED 56 YEARS, OCC CULTIVATION, R/O. ALAKAPURAM VILLAGE, H/O. MANDEVARIPALEM PITTLAVANIPALEM MANDAL, BAPATIA DISTRICT, PIN CODE - 522329. ...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 - 522238. 2. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, PANCHAYAT WING, BAPATLA DISTRICT AT BAPATLA - 522101. 3. THE DISTRICT PANCHAYAT OFFICER, BAPATLA DISTRICT AT BAPATLA - 522101. 4. THE DIVISIONAL PANCHAYAT OFFICER, BAPTALA, BAPATLA DISTRICT - 522101. 5. ALAKAPURAM GRAMA PANCHAYAT, REP.BY ITS EXECUTIVE AUTHORITY-CUM- PANCHAYAT SECRETARY, ALAKAPURAM VILLAGE PITTLAVANIPALEM MANDAL, BAPATLA DISTRICT, PIN CODE - 522329. 2 6. THE ASSISTANT ENGINEER, WATER RESOURCES DEPARTMENT, PITLAVANIPALEM MANDAL, BAPATLA DISTRICT - 522329. 7. THE TAHSILDAR, PITLAVANIPALEM MANDAL BAPATLA DISTRICT - 522329. ...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 WRIT OF MANDAMUS declaring the action of respondents more particularly 5th respondent in issuing notice dated 12.12.2025 thereby directing the petitioner to vacate his cultivation over land of Ac.0.64 cents covered by S.No.443 situated at Alluru Revenue Village, Pittalavanipalem Mandal, Bapatla District, without considering his objections dated 08.12.2025 submitted pursuant to the notice dated 04.12.2025, as illegal, irregular, irrational, without any authority of law, violative of principles of natural justice and offends Articles 14, 21 and 300-A of Constitution of India and consequently direct the respondents not to interfere in any manner with his possession of the said land 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 operation of notice dated 12.12.2025 and preceding notice dated 04.12.2025 issued by 5‘'^ respondent and consequently direct the respondents not to interfere in any manner with petitioner’s cultivation over land of Ac.0.64 cents covered by S.No.443 situated at Alluru Revenue Village, Pittalavanipalem Mandal, Bapatia District, pending disposal of the main Writ Petition Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. PETLURI NAGA RAJU Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. GP FOR PANCHAYAT RAJ RURAL DEV 3 2. GP FOR REVENUE 3. GP FOR IRRI AND CAD The Court made the following: ORDER: Issuance of the notice dated 12.12.2025 by the 5th respondent, directing the petitioner to vacate the cultivation over land to an extent of Ac.0.64 cents in Sy.No.443 situated in Alluru Revenue Village, Pittalavanipalem Mandal, Bapatla District, without considering the objection dated 08.12.2025 and without following the procedure contemplated under law, is the grievance of the petitioner. 2. Heard Sri P.Karthik, learned counsel representing Sri Petluri Nagaraju, learned counsel for the petitioner, Sri Mattegunta Sudhir, learned Standing Counsel for Gram Panchayat, Smt.Naga Chandrika, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Panchayat Raj and Sri Chandra Sekhar, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner while reiterating the contents of the affidavit contended that prior to issuance of the impugned notice dated 12.12.2025, the 5th respondent also issued notice dated 04.12.2025 asking the petitioner to vacate the subject land forthwith on the alleged ground of encroachment. He further submitted that as a precautionary measure, an explanation dated 08.12.2025 was submitted to the respondents. He further submitted that without considering the said explanation, the respondent authorities have issued the impugned notice 4 dated 12.12.2025. Though it is styled as notice, virtually a direction was given to the petitioner to vacate the subject place immediately after receiving the notice without delay. Thus, the impugned notice is unsustainable and issued in clear violation of principles of natural justice and is liable to be set aside. Accordingly, prayed to pass appropriate orders protecting the interest of the petitioner. 4. On the other hand, learned Standing Counsel for the respondents submitted that there is neither illegality nor procedural irregularity in issuing the impugned notice. In fact, the petitioner cannot assail a notice before this Court under Article 226 of Constitution of India. The writ petition is devoid of merits and liable to be dismissed. He further submitted that in the event if this Court is inclined to interfere with the said notice, a liberty may be given to the Gram Panchayat to take steps in accordance with law and accordingly, prayed to pass appropriate orders. 5. Perused the record and considered the submissions made by the learned counsel for the parties. 6. As could be culled out from the facts and submissions made by the respective parties, admittedly a notice dated 04.12.2025 has been issued to the petitioner for which he has submitted an explanation dated 08.12.2025. As rightly contended by the learned counsel for the petitioner, the notice dated 04.12.2025 & the impugned notice dated 5 12.12.2025 does not speak anything about issuance of any prior show cause notice to the petitioner. Therefore, the said notices are unsustainable and contrary to the principles of Audi Alteram Partem. 7. Despite series of directions given by the Constitutional Courts, the authorities are not adhering to such directions, and thereby issuing notices in this manner. Even otherwise, Rule 4 of G.O.Ms.No.188 dated 21.07.2011 clearly envisages that an opportunity of personal hearing has to be provided to the parties. In the present case, no such opportunity of hearing was provided to the petitioner. In view of the reasons stated supra, the notice impugned is ex facie illegal and contrary to the settled principles of law and liable to be set aside even without inviting counter. Even after inviting counter, the order would be the same. 8. Accordingly, the Writ Petition is disposed of. The impugned notice dated 12.12.2025 is hereby set aside. However, the respondent authorities are not precluded to take steps in accordance with law. There shall be no order as to costs. As a sequel, miscellaneous applications, pending if any, shall stand closed. _____________________________ JUSTICE RAVI CHEEMALAPATI Date: 06th January, 2026 RKS