All these Writ Petitions are coming up for admission to-day. Notice Before Admission had been ordered and status quo for a limited period was granted, which is being extended from time to time. In Writ Petition Nos.1 0055, 10136,10137, 10223 of 2006, 4th respondent came on record on the ground that at his instance and on his representation only, the present impugned action had been initiated and hence he must also be given opportunity of hearing in these Writ Petitions before passing an order. It is stated that in Writ Petition No.1 0274 of 2006 also the facts are similar and in fact the implead application and vacate application were already moved, and further submissions are made that inasmuch as the facts are similar, the said Writ Petition also can be disposed of.

2. These Writ Petitions are filed for a Writ of Mandamus declaring the respective notices dated 3.5.2006 issued by the 1st respondent as arbitrary, unreasonable, illegal and violative of principles of natural justice, violative of provisions of A.P. Municipalities Act and also violative of Articles 14, 19,21 and 300-A of the Constitution of India and further issue such other suitable directions.

3. The facts are almost similar in all these Writ Petitions and the averments made even in the respective counter affidavits appear to be almost similar. At the outset it may be stated that the notices impugned dated 3-5-2005 are styled as encroachment notices under Section 192 of A.P. Municipalities Act, wherein it was specified "if the encroachment is not removed by you within (7) days, the same will be got removed by this Department under Section 360 of the above said Act without giving you any further notice and the expenses incurred for removal will be recovered from you under the provisions of the Act". It is stated by the respective writ petitioners in these writ petitions that they have been in possession and enjoyment of the sites from about the year 1970 and before the present constructions, there used to be temporary constructions in the said site and in the year 1977 the then Gram Panchayat, Bhadrachalam, allotted the site in favour of the respective writ petitioners. It is also stated that in 1977, the Gram Panchayat, Bhadrachalam, allotted similar adjoining sites to nearly 70 petty vendors along with these writ petitioners in Nehru Market, Bhadrachalam, for the purpose of their livelihood, and ever since that date these writ petitioners are doing business and eking out their livelihood. The then Gram Panchayat also collected encroachment tax from these writ petitioners and this record will be with the Bhadrachalam Municipality at present. It is also stated that in the year 2000, the then Sub-Collector.

Bhadrachalam, who was Special Officer of Bhadrachalam Municipality, Smt. Neetu Prasad, I.A.S. got laid a cement road in front of their shops by making each of them to leave 5 width of land In front of the shops for the said cement roads. The said cement road was laid by collecting donations from these writ petitioners and also the other shop owners similarly placed. After the said road was laid, the Municipality treated the constructions as regular constructions and house tax was levied by giving assessment numbers to the respective shops from the year 2001-02 onwards and several averments were made in relation to the payment of tax, the assessments made, giving of assessment numbers and some relevant material in relation thereto, the tax receipts etc., had been placed before this Court. Several factual details also had been narrated in paragraphs 5 to 11 of the affidavit filed in support of the respective Writ Petitions.

4. The 4th respondent-proposed party who came on record on the ground that at his Instance only the action had been initiated and also the Special Officer. Bhadrachalam Municipality Khammam District filed Vacate Applications praying for vacating of the interim order of status quo granted by this Court in these Writ Petitions.

5. The 4th respo