APHC010454242023 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI [3332]

(Special Original Jurisdiction)

WEDNESDAY,THE THIRD DAY OF DECEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE RAVI CHEEMALAPATI WRIT PETITION NO: 23571/2023 Between:

Shree Sathya Homes ...PETITIONER AND The State Of Andhra Pradesh and Others ...RESPONDENT(S)

Counsel for the Petitioner:

1. SODUM ANVESHA Counsel for the Respondent(S):

1. GP FOR PANCHAYAT RAJ RURAL DEV

2. P PRABHAKAR RAO

3. SUBBA RAO KORRAPATI

4. Mattegunta.Sudhir,Standing Counsel For Z.P.Ps,M.P.Ps,Gram Panchayats

5. Karri kalyan Durga Prasad SC FOR TUDA The Court made the following order:

Questioning the proceedings issued by the 3^rd respondent vide Rc.No.10/2022 dated 26.07.2023, the present writ petition is filed.

2. Heard Sri P.Veera Reddy, learned Senior counsel representing learned counsel for the petitioner, Sri Korrapati Subba rao, learned counsel for the respondent nos.4 to 6, Sri K.K.Durga Prasad, learned Standing counsel for 2^nd respondent, Sri P.Prabahakara Rao, learned counsel for the respondent nos. 7 to 9, Sri Bala Krishna, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Panchayat Raj Department and Sri M.Sudhir, learned Standing counsel for the Gram Panchayat.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioners in elaboration to what has been stated in the affidavit contended that, after obtaining the layout regularization permissions and residential building construction permissions for the subject plots from the competent authority(3^rd respondent herein) on 30.04.2022, the petitioner has started construction work in the subject property. While the construction is under process (80% was completed), upon the alleged complaints of the unofficial respondents, the 3^rd respondent issued show cause notice dated 27.05.2023 seeking explanation with documents regarding the title over the property and deviations. Despite submitting an explanation on 06.06.2023, without passing a reasoned order on the same and without conducting proper enquiry, issued the impugned notice dated 26.07.2023 observing that there are a civil cases pending regarding the title and thereby kept the building plan in abeyance. As such the impugned notice is wholly unsustainable and liable be set aside and accordingly prayed to pass appropriate orders in that regard.

4. On the other hand, Sri M.Sudhir, learned Standing counsel on counter submitted that the petitioner has obtained building permission for construction of individual houses and started constructing villas in the subject property contrary to the sanctioned permission that too by occupying the unofficial respondents land. He further submitted that the Gram Panchayat has no authority to give permissions for constructions of Villas and T.U.D.A is the competent authority to give permissions for the same and the petitioner had not obtained any permission for construction of villas. In the said circumstances and by duly considering the fact that civil suits are pending between the petitioner and unofficial respondents, the Gram Panchayat has rightly issued the impugned notice by stating the reasons. As such there is no illegality or procedural irregularity while issuing the impugned notice and prayed to dismiss the writ petition.

5. Whereas, learned counsel for unofficial respondents on respective counters submitted that the petitioner has encroached the unofficial respondents land and thereby proceeding with the construction of villas. They further submitted that the petitioner has obtained the building plan by misleading and misrepresenting the facts to the Gram Panchayat. By virtue of G.O.Ms.No.67 dated 26.02.2002, the Executive Authority or the District Panchayat Officer may revoke any permission issued under these rules whenever it is found that such permission was obtained by fraudulent means or misrepresentation of facts. Further, civil suits vide O.S.No.99/2022 & O.S.No.23/2023 are pending between the petitioner and the unofficial respondents. As such no indulg