Disposed

D.Ganesh v. State of Ap., Rep.by its Secretary to Government

Andhra Pradesh HC11 Nov 2022WP/21734/2009

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In two writ petitions challenging show-cause notices issued by a Gram Panchayat regarding land constructions, the High Court held the notices to be procedural show-cause notices rather than final removal orders. The Court directed the Panchayat to provide a hearing opportunity within a specified period before taking any action.

What did the court decide?

Petitioners directed to submit explanations to the Panchayat Secretary within four to six weeks; Panchayat directed to hear them and pass appropriate orders within four weeks thereafter.

D.Ganesh Vs State of Ap., Rep.by its… — Public Procurement and Tenders | Andhra Pradesh HC (2022)

¶1

THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE C. PRAVEEN KUMAR WRIT PETITION No. 21734 of 2009

¶2

AND

¶3

WRIT PETITION No. 28452 of 2009

¶4

COMMON ORDER:

¶5

As the issue involved in both the Writ Petitions being one and the same, they are heard together and disposed of by this Common Order taking W.P. No. 21734 of 2009 as a lead Writ Petition.

¶6

The present Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of

¶7

the Constitution of India seeking the following relief:-

¶8

“….to issue Writ, Order or Direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the notices issued by 2^nd Respondent herein vide proceeding No. 9 of 2009, dated 04.07.2009 and 25.08.2009, to the Petitioners herein respectively in respect of their properties situated in Sy. No. 13, 15 and 17/5 of Avilala Gram Panchayat, Tirupati Rural Mandal, Chittoor District, as illegal, arbitrary and violative of Articles 14 and 300A of the Constitution of India and consequently set-aside the same and to pass…”

¶9

¶10

Sri. Suresh Kumar Kalava, learned Counsel appearing for the Petitioners in W.P. No. 21734 of 2009; and Ms.Sudeepthi Potluri, Advocate, representing Sri.Balaji Medamalli, learned Counsel appearing for the Petitioners in W.P. No. 28452 of 2010, submits that, though, the impugned notices issued to the Petitioners are styled as show-cause notice, but, a reading of the same would indicate as if an Order is passed directing them to remove the constructions immediately, failing which action will be taken in accordance with law. In other words, the argument of both the Counsel is that, Order of this nature came to be passed without giving an opportunity to the Petitioners to explain their stand, which would be in violation of principles of natural justice.

¶11

The learned Government Pleader for Panchayat Raj, would submit that, only notices are issued to the Petitioners calling upon them to given explanation, but, without submitting any explanation, the Petitioners approached this Court, wherein, an order of ‘status-quo’ came to be passed.

¶12

¶13

Before proceeding further, it is to be noted that, by an Order, dated 21.10.2009, this Court while issuing Rule Nisi passed the following Order:

¶14

“21.10.2009

¶15

W.P. No. 21734 of 2009

¶16

Rule Nisi. Call for Records.

¶17

List the matter along with W.P. no. 20104 of 2009 for hearing after two weeks.

¶18

W.P.M.P. No. 28234 of 2009

¶19

Pending further orders, both the parties are directed to maintain status-quo obtaining as on today.

¶20

The petitioners are directed not to make any new constructions. At the same time, the respondents are directed not to demolish the structures.

¶21

Notice.”

¶22

No application came to be filed for either

¶23

modification or vacating the Order passed by this Court in the year 2009.

¶24

A reading of the notice, impugned in the Writ Petition, would show that the Petitioners were directed to remove immediately the constructions made and if the said constructions are not removed, action will be taken

¶25

as per Gram Panchayat Act. This drastic step is sought to

¶26

¶27

be taken without giving an opportunity to the Petitioners to explain their stand about the constructions made and also as to how they came into possession of the said land.

¶28

Having regard to the above, Writ Petitions are disposed of treating the notices issued to the Petitioners vide R.C. No. 9/2009, dated 04-07-2009 & 25.08.2009 and R.C. No. 9/2010, dated 25.10.2010 & 27.10.2010, by the Office of Avilala Gram Panchayat, Tirupati Rural Mandal, as show-cause notice, to which the Petitioners herein shall submit their explanations within a period of four [04] to six [06] weeks from today. In which event, the Panchayat Secretary, Avilala Gram Panchayat, Tirupati Rural Mandal, shall pass appropriate orders in accordance with law after hearing the Petitioners within a period of four [04] weeks thereafter. Till such order is passed, the interim order passed by this Court on 21.10.2009 shall remain in force.

¶29

¶30

1. With the above direction, the Writ Petition No. 21734 of 2009 and Writ Petition No. 28452 of 2009 are disposed

¶31

of . No order as to Costs.

¶32

Consequently, miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shall stand closed.

¶33

_______________________________ JUSTICE C. PRAVEEN KUMAR

¶34

Dated: 11.11.2022 SM.

¶35

¶36

THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE C. PRAVEEN KUMAR

¶37

WRIT PETITION No. 21734 of 2009 AND

¶38

WRIT PETITION No. 28452 of 2009

¶39

Date: 11.11.2022

¶40

SM.

D.Ganesh v. State of Ap., Rep.by its Secretary to Government

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

D.Ganesh v. State of Ap., Rep.by its Secretary to Government

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

D.Pemmasani Nirmala, Vs B.Adhisheshaiah

B.N. Muthappa Vs The Government of Andhra Pradesh

G.Ramachndra Rao Vs a.Babu, IAS

Pola Somaiah and Another Vs the State of A.P and Another

Sowjanya, Vs The Government of Andhra Pradesh

Baru Krishnaiah Vs The Government of Andhra Pradesh