APHC010182232026 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3331] FRIDAY, THE TENTH DAY OF APRIL TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE SUBBA REDDY SATTI WRIT PETITION NO: 9250/2026 Between: 1. LAVANKULA SRIRANGA VARAPRASAD, S/O SATYANARAYANA, AGED ABOUT 44 YEARS R/O H.NO.1-5, SRIRAMAVARAM, T- NARSAPURAM MANDAL, ELURU DISTRICT. ...PETITIONER AND 1. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, PANCHAYAT RAJ AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT BUILDING, VELAGAPUDI, AMARAVATI, GUNTUR DISTRICT, REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY. 2. THE DISTRICT PANCHAYAT OFFICER, ELURU, ELURU DISTRICT. 3. THE TAHSILDAR, T-NARSAPURAM MANDAL, ELURU DISTRICT. 4. THE PANCHAYAT DEVELOPMENT OFFICER, EPIGUNTA, T- NARSAPURAM MANDAL, ELURU 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 issue a writ, order or a direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the 4th respondent to direct the petitioner to hand over the petitioner land situated in Sy.No.36 to an extant of Ac.0.71 cents of Epigunta Village, T-Narsapuram Mandal, Eluru District to the 4th respondent-Gram Panchayat through Notice dated 02.04.2026 (received on 04.04.2026) is highly, illegal, arbitrary and violation of Article 14 and 300-A of the Constitution of India and set aside the same 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 operation of the notice 02.04.2026 on the file of the 4th respondent, by directing the respondents not to dispossess / interfere the possession and enjoyment of the petitioner’s agriculture land in Sy.No.36 to an extant of Ac.0.71 cents situated at Epigunta Village, T-Narsapuram Mandal, Eluru District pending disposal of the writ petition and to pass Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. V V N NARAYANA RAO Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. GP FOR PANCHAYAT RAJ RURAL DEV The Court made the following: :: ORDER :: Heard Sri V.V.N.Narayana Rao, 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 and Sri Chaitanya, learned counsel representing Sri Y.Koteswara Rao, learned Standing counsel for the 4th respondent. 2. Impugning the notice issued by the Panchayat Development Officer of the 4th respondent dated 02.04.2026 (Ex.P1), 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 an extent of Ac.0.64 cents in Sy.No.36/2 and Ac.0.20 cents in Sy.No.74/2A of Epigunta Village, T-Narsapuram Mandal, Eluru District. The petitioner purchased the property under a registered document vide Doc.No.1573/1998 dated 08.06.1998 (Ex.P2). The name of the petitioner was updated in the record of rights, and a passbook was issued Ex.P5. Thereafter, the revenue authorities issued another passbook Ex.P3, wherein it was mentioned that the petitioner owns Ac.0.64 cents in Sy.No.36/2 and Ac.0.09 cents in Sy.No.74/2A. 4. Be that as it may, the Panchayat Development Officer of the 4th respondent issued a notice dated 02.04.2026 (Ex.P1), stating that the petitioner occupied an extent of Ac.0.71 cents in Sy.Nos.35 and 36 of Epigunta Village and the Tahsildar – 3rd respondent directed the 4th respondent to remove the encroachments. 5. Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that no survey was conducted in the presence of the petitioner. The alleged survey report was not furnished to the petitioner. He would further submit that the petitioner has not encroached upon the land in Sy.Nos.35 and 36 of Epigunta Village. 6. Sri Chaitanya, learned counsel representing Sri Y.Koteswara Rao, learned Standing counsel for the 4th respondent, would submit that the notice dated 02.04.2026 (Ex.P1) may be treated as a show cause notice. If the petitioner submits an explanation by annexing all the documents, the Panchayat Development Officer of the 4th respondent will consider the same and pass appropriate orders. Learned counsel for the petitioner endorses the same. 7. Ms. Usha, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue for the 3rd respondent, submitted the communication of the Tahsildar – 3rd respondent to the Panchayat Development Officer of the 4th respondent, along with a sketch. A copy of the same is handed to the learned counsel for the petitioner across the bench. 8. Given the facts and circumstances of the case, inviting a counter and keeping the writ petition pending 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 02.04.2026 (Ex.P1) shall be treated as a show cause notice. ii) The petitioner shall submit an explanation within fifteen days from today by annexing all the documents to the Panchayat Development Officer of the 4th respondent. iii) The Panchayat Development Officer of the 4th respondent shall conduct an inquiry, by providing an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner and pass a reasoned order in accordance with law, and communicate the same to the petitioner. iv) Till a reasoned order is passed, the Panchayat Development Officer of the 4th respondent shall not interfere with the petitioner’s possession of the aforementioned property as per Ex P.3 Passbook. v) There shall be no order as to costs. As a sequel, pending miscellaneous petitions, if any, shall stand closed. ___________________________ JUSTICE SUBBA REDDY SATTI Date: 10.04.2026 SNI 244 THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE SUBBA REDDY SATTI WRIT PETITION NO: 9250 OF 2026 Date: 10.04.2026 SNI