Disposed

Ch Anka Rao v. The State of Andhra Pradesh

Andhra Pradesh HC14 Feb 2024WP/261/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioner sought removal of encroachments by private respondents on gramakantam land and public street at Santhanuthalapadu. A Tahsildar survey confirmed partial encroachment. The Court disposed of the writ petition directing the Gram Panchayat to initiate due-process removal proceedings.

What did the court decide?

Direction to Gram Panchayat to initiate appropriate proceedings for removal of encroachments reported by the Tahsildar, following due process of law.

Ch Anka Rao Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh — Municipal and Town Planning | Andhra Pradesh HC (2024)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH :: AMARAVATI [ 3329 ] (Special Original Jurisdiction)

¶2

THURSDAY ,THE FIFTEENTH DAY OF FEBRUARY

¶3

TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FOUR

¶4

PRESENT

¶5

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE VENKATESWARLU NIMMAGADDA

¶6

WRIT PETITION NO: 261 OF 2018

¶7

Between:

¶8

Ch Anka Rao, S/o. Nacharaiah,R/o.d.No 3-28, Ganugupalem Bazar, Santhanuthalapadu village and mandal Prakasam District. State if A.P

¶9

...PETITIONER(S)

¶10

AND

¶11

The State of Andhra Pradesh, Rep.by,its Prinicpal Secretary, Panchayat Raj and Rural Development Department Secretariat, Velagapudi, Amaravathi, Guntur District

¶12

The commissioner, Panchayat Raj and Rural Development Department., Charitasri Hospital Building Suryaraopeta Vijayawada,krishna District.

¶13

The District Collector Pts, Ongole, Prakasam District.

¶14

The District Panchayat Officer, Ongole, Prakasam District.

¶15

The Santhanuthalapapdu Gram Panchayat, Rep.by its Executive Officer, Santhanuthalapadu Village and Mandal, prakasam District.

¶16

Vemulapati Bhagya Lakshmi, W/o. Venkata Eswaraiah, Aged about not known, R/o, D.No. 3-27 Ganugupalem Bazar, Santhanuthalapadu Village and Mandal Prakasam District.

¶17

Vemulapati Venkata Eswaraiah, S/o. Late Subbarao, Aged about not known, R/o. D.No. 3-27, Ganugupalem Bazar, Santhanuthalapadu Village and Mandal Prakasam District.

¶18

...RESPONDENTS

¶19

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 topleased to issue a writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of writ of mandamus directing the 5th respondent herein to initiate action as per statutory rule issued in G.O.Ms.No. 555, PR and RD., dt

¶20

¶21

3.12.1999 with regard to encroachment of 6th and 7th respondents in Syno. 970/1 and Sy.No 997/1 which is the grama kantam land situated at Santhanuthalapadu Gram Panchayat, Santhanthalapadu Mandal Prakasam District and by further declaring that the gross in action amounts to violative of law laid down in Jagpal Singh and other vs. state of Punjab and others reported in 2011(11) SCC 396 and further violative of rights guaranteed under Article 14 and 21 of the Constitution of India and pass

¶22

IA NO: 2 OF 2018

¶23

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 vacate the interim order dated: 18-01-2018 in W.P.No. 261 of 2018 of this Honorable Court in the interest of justice and pass

¶24

IA NO: 1 OF 2018

¶25

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 Direct the 5th respondent herein to initiate action as per statutory rules issued in G.O.Ms.No.555,P.R.,dt.3.12.1999 with regard tp encroachment of 6th and 7th respondents in Sy.No.970/1 and Sy.no.997/1 which is the grama kantam Land situated at Santhanuthalapadu Gram Panchayat, Santhanuthalapadu Mandal, Prakasam District Pending disposal of the above writ petition and pass

¶26

Counsel for the Petitioner(s):SRI. V MALLIK

¶27

Counsel for the Respondents: GP FOR PANCHAYAT RAJ RURAL DEV (AP)

¶28

The Court made the following:

¶29

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned

¶30

Government Pleader for Revenue and learned Standing Counsel appearing for respondent No.5.

¶31

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that unofficial respondent Nos.6 and 7 made illegal construction by occupying the land in Sy.No.970/1 and Sy.No.997/1, which is classified as

¶32

¶33

gramakantam land. Even though, the petitioner brought to the notice of respondent No.5 by way of written instructions dated 20.11.2017, respondent No.5 neither initiated any steps nor removed the admitted encroachments by respondent Nos.6 and 7. Hence, the Writ Petition.

¶34

In view of directions from this Court dated 16.08.2023, the concerned Tahsildar conducted a survey and submitted the report dated 02.09.2023, wherein it is stated that the unofficial respondent Nos.6 and 7 have encroached on the public street to an extent of 46 sq. ft., and constructed a pucca building in Sy.No.76 of Santhanuthalapdu Village, but not in Sy.No.970/1 and 997/1. He further furnished the village map as well as the revenue record, wherein the land in Sy.No.970 is owned by one Mr.Maddi Panakala alias Basavayya, and three others, but the land in Sy.No.997 is classified as gramakantam/village site.

¶35

In view of the report submitted by the Tahsildar concerned,

¶36

the allegation of the petitioner that the unofficial respondents have encroached the subject property is partially correct.

¶37

In view of the facts and circumstances of the case, it is a settled proposition of law that if any encroachments are found, it

¶38

¶39

is the duty of the local authorities, i.e., respondent No.5/Gram Panchayat as mandated under Section 98 of the Panchayat Raj Act (hereinafter called ‘the Act'), that any illegal encroachment shall be removed by following due process as contemplated under the law. Accordingly, the learned Standing Counsel, appearing for respondent No.5, undertakes to follow due process of law for the removal of encroachments as reported by the Tahsildar in his report dated 02.09.2023.

¶40

Having regard to the submissions made by the learned Standing Counsel appearing for respondent No.5 and on perusal of material available on record, this Court is of the considered view to dispose of the present Writ Petition by directing the respondent No.5/Gram Panchayat to initiate appropriate proceedings for removal of encroachments by the unofficial respondents as reported by the Tahsildar concerned vide his report dated 02.09.2023 within a reasonable time by duly following the due process of law as contemplated under the Act.

¶41