Administrative notices alleging encroachment must adhere to the principles of natural justice, requiring the authority to provide the evidentiary basis (such as survey reports), grant a fair opportunity for a hearing, and issue a reasoned order before taking coercive action.

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 Writ or Order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus, declaring the impugned notice vide Rc.No.02/2026/GP, dated 16.04.2026 issued by the 5th respondent to the petitioners to demolish the approved new construction of their RCC building in R.S.No.77 of G.Kothapalli village and Panchayat alleged to be encroached of 5 yards of land in R.S.No.104 of G.Kothapalli Village, Dwaraka Tirumala Mandal, Eluru District, which is quite illegal, arbitrary and unjust and also violating the Andhra Pradesh Panchayat Raj Act, 1994 and also violation of Article, 14, 19, 21 and 300-A of the Constitution of India and quash the impugned notice and consequently to direct the respondents 2 to 5 not to ever interfere with the petitioners' peaceful possession and enjoyment of the newly constructed RCC building of the petitioners is situated in survey No.77 of G.Kothapalli village, Dwaraka Tirumala Mandal Eluru District and to consider the written explanation dated 20.04. 2026 of the petitioners to the 5th respondent on the impugned notice dated 16.04.2026 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 impugned notice vide Rc.No.02/2026/GP, dated 16.04.2026 issued by 5th respondent to the petitioners to demolish the new construction of their RCC building alleged to be encroached of 5 yards of land in R.S.No.104 of G.Kothapalli Village, Dwaraka Tirumala Mandal, Eluru District, till disposal of the writ petition and to pass

Counsel for the Petitioner(S):

1. K J V N PUNDAREEKAKSHUDU

Counsel for the Respondent(S):

1. GP FOR PANCHAYAT RAJ RURAL DEV

2. GP FOR REVENUE

The Court made the following order:

Heard Sri K.Srinivas, learned counsel for the petitioners, Sri P.Rajesh Kumar, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Panchayat Raj and Rural Development for the respondents 1 and 3, Ms. Usha, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue for the respondents 2 and 4, and Sri Chaitanya, learned counsel representing Sri Y.Koteswara Rao, learned Standing counsel for the 5th respondent.

2. Impugning the notice issued by the Panchayat Secretary of the 5th respondent vide R.C.No.02/2026/GP dated 16.04.2026 (Ex.P1), the petitioners filed the above writ petition.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioners would submit that the petitioners’ father purchased a site admeasuring 139.88 Square Yards about six decades ago and constructed a tiled house therein. The Gram Panchayat initially assigned house No.2-28, which was subsequently changed to house No.2-37. The taxes are being paid regularly. No document was initially obtained from the vendor; later, the vendor’s son executed a registered sale deed dated 29.08.2022, registered on 01.09.2022 as Document No.6407/2022. The petitioners applied to the Gram Panchayat for the grant of building permission. The 5th respondent issued permission vide B.A.No.1/2026 dated 03.01.2026 (Ex.P6).

4. Be that as it may, one Sri R.Stayanaryana, filed W.P.No.1294 of 2026, stating that the PGRS complaint made by him, vis-à-vis, encroachment by the petitioners herein regarding the construction of a shopping complex was not attended to. An interim order was passed therein.

5. Without conducting any inquiry, the notice vide R.C.No.02/2026/GP dated 16.04.2026 (Ex.P1) was issued, alleging that the petition