Back
2023 Supreme(Online)(AP) 12330
HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH TUESDAY ,THE TWENTY FIFTH DAY OF JULY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY THREE PRSENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE RAVI CHEEMALAPATI WRIT PETITION NO: 18641 OF 2023 Between:
1. CHAPPIDI DURGA RAO S/o Rayudu, aged about 43 years occ. coolie r/o D.o no 23/18 mannevaripalem, Achantamandal ,West Godavari dist.
2. Ketha Chandra rao S/o of Krishna murthy aged about 56 years, occ coolie r/o D.o no 24/154 mannevaripalem, Achantamandal west Godavari dist.
3. Gadiraju Thimotiraju S/o kanakaraju, aged about 53 years occ church father r/o D.o no 23/87,mannevaripalem, Achantamandal, west Godavari dist.
4. Chelliboyina Nagaraju S/o Angalu, aged about 55 years occ coolie r/o D.o no 23/155,mannevaripalem, Achantamandal, west Godavari dist ...PETITIONER(S)
AND:
1. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH Rep by its principle secretary, Ministry of panchayati raj and rural developmental department, secretariat buildings velagapudi, Amaravati.
5. The Dist collector, west Godavari dist, Bhimavaram.
6. The Achanta grama panchayat rep by its secretary, Achnata village and Mandal West Godavari dist.
7. The Tahsildar, Achanta mandal, west Godavari dist
8. The Executive Engineer, Road and buildings department, Bhimavaram, west Godavari dist
9. Smt. Meka Manga laxmi w/o venkateshwarrao aged about 55 years occ cultivation r/o Anakapalli, Anakapalli dist.
...RESPONDENTS Counsel for the Petitioner(s): BOKKA SATYANARAYANA KAMLA Counsel for the Respondents: GP FOR PANCHAYAT RAJ RURAL DEV The Court made the following: ORDER THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE RAVI CHEEMALAPATI WRIT PETITION NO.18641 OF 2023
ORDER:
The present writ petition is filed seeking the following relief: “…..declaring the impugned proceedings dated 22.07.2023 of the 3rd respondent directed the petitioners to remove/ demolish the residential houses/structures in R.S.No.394/1,2 of R and B deparment situated at Manevaripalem, Achanta village and Mandal as illegal, arbitrary without jurisdiction and contrary to Land enchrochment act apart from the violative of article 14, 16, 21 and 300-A of the constitution of India and set aside the same and consequentially to direct the respondents not to remove/ demolish the residential houses/ structures of the petitioners in R.S.No.394/, 2 of R and B deparment situated at Manevaripalem, Achanta village and Mandal without jurisdiction and contrary to Land Enchrochment Act and to pass….”
2. The short grievance of the petitioners is that, the authorities are trying to remove/demolish the residential house/structures of the petitioners in R.S.No.394/1,2 of R&B Department situated at Manevaripalem, Achanta village and Mandal, under the guise of the impugned proceedings issued by 3rd respondent dated 22.07.2023.
3. Heard Sri Bokka Satyanarayana, learned counsel for petitioners, Sri N. Sri Hari, learned standing counsel for Gram Panchayat, Raj, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Roads and Buildings, representing 5threspondent, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Panchayat Raj representing 1st respondent and learned Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue representing respondent nos.2 & 4.
4. Learned counsel for petitioners in elaboration to what has been stated in the affidavit contended that, under the guise of the impugned proceedings dated 22.07.2023, the authorities are contemplating to dispossess the petitioners by demolishing the existing construction in R.S.No.394/1,2 of R& B Department which are situated in Manevaripalem. He further contended that, the impugned proceedings though styled as notice, virtually it contains a direction to the petitioners to remove the alleged encroachments and further submitted that no prior show cause notice has been issued before passing impugned proceedings. As such the impugned proceedings are unsustainable and contrary to the principles of law and in violation of principles of natural justice. He further submitted that, if the authorities are permitted to accomplish the command contained in the notice, the petitioners’ right guaranteed under constitution of India would be defeated. As such, prayed to protect the interest of the petitioners.
5. On the other hand, learned standing counsel contended that, by virtue of Section 53 and 98 of AP Panchayat Raj Act, the Gram Panchayat is competent to take steps in removing the encroachments and in the present case, as the petitioners have encroached the road margin of R&B, the impugned proceedings dated 22.07.2023 has been issued. However, he further fairly contended that, the authorities ought to have issued proper show cause notice and invited explanation from the petitioners before issuing the impugned notice and in the event, this court inclines to interfere with the said impugned proceedings/notice, a liberty may be given to the authorities to follow steps in accordance with law.
6. To the said submission, learned counsel for petitioners reported no objection.
7. Perused the record.
8. The record discloses that the 6th respondent filed W.P.No.14178/2017 arraying the petitioners as Respondent Nos. 7 to 10 complaining inaction of the official respondents in removing the unauthorized and illegal occupation made by the respondent nos.7 to 11 therein. The said W.P.No.14178/2017 was disposed of considering the submissions made by the learned Government Pleader for Roads & Buildings basing on the written instructions that the R&B authorities are taking steps to remove the encroachments through the revenue authorities. It seems that pursuant to the orders passed in the above writ petition, the impugned proceedings came to be issued. The impu
