ORDER:

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, who appeared through online.

2. Also heard learned Assistant Government Pleader for Panchayat Raj appearing on behalf of the 1st respondent, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Roads & Buildings appearing on behalf of the 4th respondent and learned Standing Counsel appearing on behalf of the 5th respondent.

3. The grievance of the petitioner in the present writ petition is that respondent Nos.4 & 5 are trying to dispossess the petitioner from the subject matter property situated in R.S.No.236 of Rayakuduru Village without conducting survey and without following due process of law and same is illegal and unjust.

4. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner and her family members are in continuous possession and enjoyment of the land in an extent of Ac.0.15 cents situated in R.S.No.236 of Rayakuduru Village. He submits that the Gram Panchayat had assigned a door number to the said property and the petitioner is paying applicable taxes to the Gram Panchayat. He also submits that the petitioner is availing electricity connection to the subject matter property and there are no arrears. That being the position, learned counsel for the petitioner, states that the 5th respondent, at the instance of the 7th respondent who filed OS.No.370 of 2023 on the file of the Court of Junior Civil Judge, Bhimavaram, issued notices alleging that the petitioner made some construction in the Government land and sought to dispossess her from the subject matter property. He submits that the said action on the part of the respondent Nos.4 & 5 is not tenable and in those circumstances, the petitioner is constrained to approach this Court seeking appropriate directions.

5. The learned Standing Counsel, on the other hand, submits that the allegations made by the petitioner are not correct and in fact the Panchayat Secretary issued appropriate notices in accordance with law on 30.09.2023 and 30.10.2023. Though the petitioner received the same, she did not choose to offer any explanation. He submits that under the said circumstances, the Panchayat Secretary issued proceedings dated 02.12.2023 calling upon the petitioner to vacate and remove the encroachments made by her and without even challenging the said proceedings, the present writ petition is filed. Learned counsel also submits that the Writ Petition is liable to be dismissed, as the petitioner has an alternative remedy of Appeal against the proceedings dated 02.12.2023.

6. Considered the submissions made and perused the material on record. Though, the learned counsel sought to impress upon this Court, in his reply that the petitioner has not submitted the explanation to the notices issued by the Panchayat Secretary as she is an illiterate, the same merits no acceptance. Petitioner instead of availing the opportunity afforded to her by submitting the material in support of her case. The other contentions with regard to the action alleged to be initiated against the petitioner in view of the rivalry/civil litigation between the petitioner and the 7th respondent may not be any relevancy. When, the concerned authorities issued notices alleging that certain constructions were made by encroaching upon the Government land, it is for the petitioner to respond to the same. Be that as it may. In the present case, admittedly such an opportunity was afforded to the petitioner and the Panchayat Secretary issued proceedings dated 02.12.2023 calling upon the petitioner to remove the unauthorized/illegal constrction.

7. As rightly contended by the learned counsel for the respondents against the proceedings of the Panchayat Secretary, an Appeal lies to the Gram Panchayat under Section 128 of Andhra Pradesh Panchayat Raj Act. Therefore, without going into the merits/other aspects, this Court instead of keeping the Writ Petition pending, is inclined to dispose of the same, leaving it open to the petitioner to avail the remedy of Appeal against the