Disposed

Shaik Shaheena, v. The State of Andhra Pradesh

Andhra Pradesh HC21 Nov 2023WP/30162/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Writ petition challenging notices dated 10.11.2023 issued by a Gram Panchayat to remove unauthorized constructions. The High Court set aside the notices for violating natural justice principles as they contained directions without affording an opportunity of hearing, remitting the matter for issuance of a proper show-cause notice.

What did the court decide?

Notices dated 10.11.2023 set aside; respondents permitted to issue appropriate show cause notice before further action.

Shaik Shaheena, Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh — Landlord and Tenant | Andhra Pradesh HC (2023)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH :: AMARAVATI

¶2

(Special Original Jurisdiction)

¶3

TUESDAY, THE TWENTY FIRST DAY OF NOVEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY THREE

¶4

PRESENT

¶5

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE NINALA JAYASURYA

¶6

WRIT PETITION NO: 30162 OF 2023

¶7

Between:

¶8

Shaik Shaheena, W/o. Subhahani, Aged 50 years, R/o. High School Road, A.S.Peta Village 4 Mandal, SPSR Nellore District.

¶9

Pathan Sarthaj, W/o. Pathan Mujeer, Aged 39 years, R/o. Gate Dargha Center, A.S.Peta Village and Mandal, SPSR Nellore District. ...PETITIONERS

¶10

AND

¶11

The State of Andhra Pradesh, Rep. by its Principal Secretary, Panchayat Raj Department, A.P. Secretariat, Velagapudi, Guntur District.

¶12

A.S. Peta Grama Panchayat, Rep. by its Panchayat Secretary, A.S.Peta, SPSR Nellore District.

¶13

...RESPONDENTS

¶14

Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India is filed praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased to issue any writ, order or direction, preferably^{awritinthenatureofWrit} of Mandamus declaring the notices dated 10.11.2023 issued by the 2 nd respondent against the petitioners as illegal, arbitrary violative of Articles 14, 21 and 300A of the Constitution of India apart from violation of principles of natural justice and also against the order dated 11.10.2023 in W.P. (PIL) No. 163 of 2023 and consequently set-aside the notices dated 10.11.2023 issued by the 2 nd respondent against the petitioners.

¶15

lA NO: 1 OF 2023

¶16

Petition under Section 151 CPC is filed praying that^{inthecircumstances} stated in the affidavit filed in support of the writ petition, the High Court may be pleased to suspend the notices dated 10.11.2023 issued by the 2"'' respondent against the petitioners pending disposal of the above writ petition.

¶17

Counsel for the Petitioners: SRI V. VINOD K REDDY Counsel for the Respondent No.1: GP FOR PANCHAYAT RAJ& RURAL DEV Counsel for the Respondent No.2:SRI G. VENKAT REDDY, SC FOR GRAM PANCHAYAT The Court made the following: ORDER

¶18

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH::AMARAVATI THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE NINALA JAYASURYA

¶19

WRIT PETITION No.30162 of 2023

¶20

iBetween:-

¶21

Shaik Shaheena and another

¶22

.... Petitioners

¶23

And

¶24

The State of Andhra Pradesh, Rep. by its Principal Secretary, Panchayat Raj Department and another.

¶25

.... Respondents

¶26

Counsel for the Petitioner : Mr. V. Vinod K Reddy. Counsel for the Respondents : G.P. for Panchayat Raj Mr.G. Venkat Reddy, Standing counsel

¶27

ORDER:

¶28

This Writ Petition is filed seeking to declare the^Notices dated 10.11.2023, issued by the 2"^ respondent to the petitioners as illegal, arbitrary etc., and contrary^totheorder dated 11.10.2023, passed in W.P (PIL) No. 163 of 2023^andfor consequential directions.

¶29

Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and also^heard the learned Assistant Government Pleader for Panchayat Raj and the learned standing counsel for the Gram Panchayat.

¶30

¶31

Learned counsel for the petitioners advanced arguments with reference to the averments made in the Writ affidavit, inter alia, stating that the petitioners are the absolute^owners and possessors of an extent of 2 % Ankanams, equivalent^to 22 Sq.yards, in Sy.No.l33 of A.S.Peta village and Mandal, SPSR Nellore District, which is situated in Gram kantam. He submits that the said land was purchased through a Registered Sale Deed dated 12.06.2018, and prior to^thatthe petitioners’ vendor purchased the said land through a registered sale deed. Learned counsel for the petitioner^had also referred to the title in favour of the petitioner in respect of the land an extent of 1.36 ankanams, equivalent^to 11 Sq.yards, in Sy.No.l33 of A.S.Peta village. Be that^as it may. According to him, the grievance of the petitioners^isthat the 2*^d respondent on the premise that the petitioners^have occupied the grama kantam land and made some constructions, has issued a notice dated 10.11.2023, referring to the orders passed by the HonT^le High Court of Andhra Pradesh in W.P.(PIL) No. 163 of 2023 and the said notice contains directions to remove the alleged encroachments. He submits that before issuing the said notice, no show cause

¶32

¶33

notice was issued to the petitioner and no opportunity of hearing was afforded muchless to submit their explanation^to the proposed action. He submits that the proposed action^on the part of the 2*^^ respondent without affording any opportunity to the petitioner is not legally sustainable. 4. Learned standing counsel appearing on behalf of the^{2’^^} respondent made submissions and tried to impress upon^this Court that pursuant to the orders passed in W.P.(PIL)^No.163 of 2023, the 2”^ respondent had initiated action and the grievance of the petitioner is not well founded. 5. This Court has considered the submissions made and perused the material on record including the order dated 11.10.2023, in W.P.(PIL) No. 163 of 2023. The HonT)le Division Bench while disposing of the said PIL relating to unauthorized constructions in grama kantam lands, inter alia, observed that whether the construction is being^made upon authorizedly o-r with the permission of the gram panchayat authorities or not, being grama kantam land^isan issue, which has to be decided by the Gram Panachayat only. has to be gone into by the Secretary of the Gram Panchayat. In the light of the said observations, to the mind^ofthisCourt

¶34

¶35

the Secretary of the 2"'^ respondent-gram panchayat is required to issue a proper show cause notice to the petitioners before initiating any further action. But as seen from the impugned notice it would appear that the 2^^ respondent had misunderstood the orders of the HonTDle Division Bench. Be that as it may, the said notice as contended by the learned counsel for the petitioners^contains directions, which are in the nature of an order. The^directions as contained in the notice dated 10.11.2023, without affording an opportunity to the petitioners is violative of principles of natural justice. On that ground the notice impugned is liable to be set aside. At this stage, learned counsel for the 2'^^ respondent states that appropriate^show cause notice would be issued to the petitioners and^further action in accordance with the law will be initiated. 6. In the light of the submissions made and the conclusions arrived at supra, the notices, dated 10.11.2023, are set aside. However, this order would not preclude^{the2^^^} respondent to issue an appropriate show cause notice^tothe petitioners before initiating any further action in^thematter.

¶36

¶37

¶38

With the above observation the Writ Petition is disposed

¶39

of. No costs.

¶40

As a sequel, all pending Miscellaneous Applications, if

¶41

any,.shall stand closed.

¶42

Sd/- B. CHITTI JOSEPH

ASSISTANT REGISTRAR

//TRUE COPY//

<8ECTI0N OFFICER

To,

The Principal Secretary, Panchayat Raj Department, State of Andhra Pradesh, A.P. Secretariat, Velagapudi, Guntur District.

¶48

The Panchayat Secretary, A.S. Peta Grama Panchayat, A.S.Peta, SPSR Nellore District.

¶49

One CC to Sri V. Vinod K Reddy, Advocate [OPUC]

¶50

One CC to Sri G. Venkata Reddy, SC for Gram Panchayat[OPUC] 5. Two CCs to GP for Panchayat Raj and Rural Development, High Court of Andhra Pradesh [OUT]

¶51

Three CD Copies.

ssb gl

HIGH COURT

DATED:21/11/2023

ORDER

WP.No.30162 of 2023

ADP

DISPOSING OF THE W.P. WITHOUT COSTS

Shaik Shaheena, v. The State of Andhra Pradesh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Shaik Shaheena, v. The State of Andhra Pradesh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Yelamanchili Sandhya Vs the State of Andhra Pradesh

Shaik Shakir Basha, Vs Prl.Secy., Social Welfare dept., State of A.P.

Nannapuneni Venkateswarlu Vs the State of Andhra Pradesh

Marella Venkateswarlu Vs the State of Ap

Sri Kodanda Ramalayam Setti Balija Sankshema Sangam, Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh

Bhimineni Anjaneyulu Vs the State of Andhra Pradesh