THE HON’ BLE SRI JUSTICE NAGESH BHEEMAPAKA WRIT PETITION No.17963 of 2020

ORDER:

The case of the petitioners, precisely, as per the writ affidavit, is that they are running Shops (like Pan shop, Xerox & Internet shop, Sweet and Bakery shop etc.) in the land in Survey No.129 of Charla village and mandal, BhadradriKothagudem District; and the land is situated opposite to the RTC Bus stand and the land belongs to the Grampanchayat. They are paying the license fee to the Grampanchayat. On an earlier occasion, when the respondent-authorities have tried to demolish their shops, they filed writ petitions i.e., W.P.No.28203 of 2013, and W.P.No.12695 of 2020, and this Court directed the authorities to follow due process of law before taking action against the petitioners. It is the grievance of the petitioners now in this writ petition that the 2^nd respondent-Executive Engineer issued a Notice dated 03.10.2020 (served on the petitioners on 04.10.2020) wherein the petitioners were directed to vacate the premises within seven days from the date of receipt of notice, or else they will be evicted.

2. Heard Mr. Mummaneni Srinivasa Rao, learned counsel for the petitioners; and learned Government Pleader for Roads & Buildings for respondent Nos.1 to 3; learned Standing Counsel appearing for respondent No.4-RTC; learned Standing counsel for Zilla Praja Parishad appearing for respondent No.5-Grampanchayat; learned Government Pleader for Revenue for respondent No.6-Tahsildar; learned Government Pleader for Home for respondent No.7-SHO, Charla Police Station. Perused the record.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioners, while making submissions on the lines of writ affidavit, contends that the impugned Notice dated 03.10.2020 though titled as “Show Cause Notice”, it is a direction straightaway to vacate the shops within seven days. Learned counsel draws attention to the order passed in W.P.No.12695 of 2020 in which the earlier Notice dated 31.07.2020 issued by the 3^rd respondent-Deputy Executive Engineer, R&B, was under challenge, and this Court disposed of the writ petition as follows:

“The learned Government Pleader has fairly stated that the official respondents have not issued any show cause notice calling for an explanation from the petitioners as to why action should not be taken against them under the relevant provisions of law and has straight away issued the impugned proceedings asking the petitioners to vacate the premises within a period of fifteen days.

Prima facie, this Court is of the opinion that, without issuing a notice, asking the petitioners to vacate the subject premises is not in consonance with law. The official respondents should have first issued a show cause notice calling for an explanation from the petitioners and after affording them an opportunity of hearing, pass necessary orders. The ends of justice would be met, if the impugned notices are set aside and the official respondents are directed to issue a fresh show cause notice seeking an explanation from the petitioners herein and after receipt of an explanation, afford them an opportunity of hearing and pass necessary orders strictly in accordance with law. If any adverse orders are passed against the petitioners, the same shall be communicated to the parties forthwith.

The writ petition is accordingly disposed of. The miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shall stand closed. There shall be no order as to costs.”

Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the 2^nd respondent vide impugned Notice refers to the orders passed in WP No.12695 of 2020 and erroneously mentions that the writ petition was dismissed, and further directs the petitioners to vacate within 15 days. It is contended that a Show Cause notice should call for explanation and afford an opportunity of hearing before taking action as per law; but the 2^nd respondent has straightaway directed the petitioners to vacate from the premises without following due process of law in spite of specific direction of