Allowed

Masta Nageswarara Rao v. the State of Andhra Pradesh

Andhra Pradesh HC5 Mar 2026WP/6422/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

A writ petition challenging a final show cause notice for alleged encroachment, praying to quash the notice for violating principles of natural justice and statutory procedure by issuing it without considering the petitioner's explanation or affording a hearing; Court directed authorities to consider the reply and grant hearing.

What did the court decide?

Impugned show cause notice set aside; Respondent directed to consider petitioner's explanation, provide hearing, and pass speaking order within four weeks; Petitioner's possession protected till then.

Masta Nageswarara Rao Vs the State of Andhra Pradesh — Property and Title | Andhra Pradesh HC (2026)

¶1

::1::

¶2

APHC010120672026

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI

¶4

(Special Original Jurisdiction)

¶5

FRIDAY,THE SIXTH DAY OF MARCH TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX

¶6

PRESENT

¶7

HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE VENKATESWARLU NIMMAGADDA WRIT PETITION NO: 6422/2026

¶8

Between:

¶9

MASTA NAGESWARARA RAO, S/O. MATSA RAMACHANDRA RAO, AGED ABOUT 48 YEARS, R/O. D.NO.4-414, ANGARA VILLAGE, KAPILESWARAPURAM MANDAL, DR. AMBEDKAR KONASEEMA DISTRICT (FORMERLY PART OF EAST GODAVARI DISTRICT), ANDHRA PRADESH.

¶10

...PETITIONER

¶11

AND

¶12

THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY,DEPARTMENT OF PANCHAYAT RAJ RURAL DEVELOPMENT,VELAGAPUDI, AMARAVATI, GUNTUR DISTRICT.-522238 2.

¶13

THE GRAM PANCHAYAT OF ANGARA, ANGARA VILLAGE, KAPILESWARAPURAM MANDAL, DR. AMBEDKAR KONASEEMA DISTRICT ANDHRA PRADESH, REP BY THE PANCHAYAT SECRETARY, -516104

¶14

THE PANCHAYAT DEVELOPMENT OFFICER, ANGARA VILLAGE GRAM PANCHAYAT, KAPILESWARAPURAM MANDAL,

¶15

THE TAHSILDAR, ,KAPILESWARAPURAM MANDAL, DR. AMBEDKAR KONASEEMA DISTRICT, ANDHRA PRADESH-51710

¶16

...RESPONDENT(S):

¶17

::2::

¶18

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 of Mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction, declaring the action of the Respondents, more particularly, the Respondent Nos.2 3 in issuing Final Show Cause notice vide R.C.No. 109/2025 dated 24.02.2026 directing the petitioner herein to remove the alleged encroachments to an extent of Ac.0.021 cents in Sy. No. 219 of Anghara Village, Kapileswarapuram Mandal, Dr. B.R. Ambedkar Konaseema District (formerly part of East Godavari District) within 10 days from the date of receipt of the notice, without considering the reply dated 03.01.2026 submitted by the petitioner to the initial show cause notice and without affording an opportunity of personal hearing as illegal, arbitrary, against the principles of natural justice, and violative of Articles 14, 21 and 300-Aof the Constitution of India and Consequently set aside the impugned notice vide proceedings R.C.No. 109/2025 dated 24.02.2026 issued by the Respondent Nos.2 3 and further direct the Respondents herein not to interfere with Petitioners peaceful possession and enjoyment over the subject, admeasuring an extent of Ac.0.021 cents in Survey No.219 situate in Angara Village, Kapileswarapuram Mandal, Dr.B.R.Ambedkar Konaseema District and pass

¶19

Counsel for the Petitioner:

¶20

1.N ASHWANI KUMAR

¶21

Counsel for the Respondent(S):

¶22

1.GP FOR PANCHAYAT RAJ RURAL DEV

¶23

::3::

¶24

HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE VENKATESWARLU NIMMAGADDA

¶25

W.P.No.6422 of 2026

¶26

This Court made the following

¶27

ORDER:

¶28

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is in peaceful possession and enjoyment of the land admeasuring Ac.0.03 cents in Plot No.441, situated in Sy.No.219 of Angara Village, Kapileswarapuram Mandal, East Godavari District. Learned counsel submits that the petitioner has been in possession and enjoyment of the said land since long time. While so, without following due procedure the 2^nd Respondent – Gram Panchayat issued final showcause notice dated 24.02.2026 directing the petitioner to vacate from the subject land within 10 days from the receipt of the final show cause notice dated 24.02.2026.

¶29

2. Learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that the impugned final show cause notice was preceded by two show cause notices dated 20.12.2025 and 06.01.2026 respectively, for which the petitioner submitted his detailed explanation dated 03.01.2026. Without considering the said explanation dated 03.01.2026, having invited to submit explanation by the respondent authorities and again

¶30

::4::

¶31

issuing final show cause notice directing the petitioner to vacate from the subject land is contrary to the due procedure as contemplated under A.P. Garm Panchayat Property Rules, 2011 and Section 98 of the Andhra Pradesh Panchayat Raj Act, 1994.

¶32

3. On the other hand, learned Standing Counsel appearing on behalf of 2^nd and 3^rd Respondents furnished written instructions dated 06.03.2026 wherein it is stated that the Gram Panchayat after conducting detailed enquiry it was found that altogether 132 members have occupied the land admeasuring Ac.10.50 cents in Sy.No.219A of Vura Cheruvu land. For removal of such unauthorised occupations, the Gram Panchayat initiated steps in view of the directions of this Hon’ble Court dated 09.07.2025 in W.P.No.112 of 2025. Out of 132 members, 14 members were submitted their possession certificates said to have been issued by the Tahsildar concerned and 61 members did not submit any documents but submitted their applications on 08.01.2026 pleading not to evict and regularize the occupations. It is further asserts that as per the report of the Tahsildar concerned, the certificates did not tally with their office records. 4. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Standing Counsel for Gram Panchayat and perused the material on record.

¶33

::5::

¶34

5. The fact remains that the petitioner is claiming ownership against the house site pursuant to the patta granted by the then Mandal Revenue Officer, Kapileswarapuram on 20.07.1993 in respect of land to an extent of Ac.0.021 cents in Sy.No.219 and was numbered as Plot No.441. As contended by learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner is claiming his rights and submitted explanation against the show cause notice issued by the 2^nd respondent and without considering the same, continuously issuing show cause notices one after other again and again naming as final show cause notice without considering documents and without passing any speaking order is contrary to law is valid and merit submission for the reason that, once the 2nd respondent issued a show cause notice inviting an explanation and the petitioner herein had submitted his explanation, it is the bounded duty of the 2^nd respondent to consider and deal with the same and to pass a speaking order as contemplated and issuing further show cause notices without addressing the explanation already submitted by the petitioner is clearly is arbitrary, illegal and untenable. As per Rule (4) of the Andhra Pradesh Gram Panchayats (Protection of Property) Rules, 2011, it is specifically contemplates the procedure for eviction of encroachments if any within the Gram Panchayat. Even as per Section 98 of the Andhra Pradesh

¶35

::6::

¶36

Panchayat Raj Act, 1994, the respondent authorities are obligated to follow the due procedure as contemplated under the said Act and Rules made thereunder and adhere to the principles of natural justice by providing an opportunity of hearing.

¶37

6. In the instant case after receipt of explanation submitted by the petitioner, the 2^nd respondent neither considered the explanation nor provided an opportunity of hearing. Instead the 2^nd Respondent issued final show cause notice directing the petitioner to vacate the subject land is certainly contrary to Section 98 of the Andhra Pradesh Panchayat Raj Act, 1994 as well as Rule (4) of the Andhra Pradesh Gram Panchayats (Protection of Property) Rules, 2011 and also violative of the basic tenets of administrative law. It is appropriate to read Section 98 of the Andhra Pradesh Panchayat Raj Act, 1994 and Rule (4) of the Andhra Pradesh Gram Panchayats (Protection of Property) Rules, 2011 extracting the same as under:

¶38

“Section 98 of the Andhra Pradesh Panchayat Raj Act, 1994

¶39

98. Removal of encroachments - (1) The executive authority may, by notice, require the owner or occupier of any building to remove or alter any projection, encroachment or obstruction, other than a door, gate, bar or ground floor window, situated against or in front of such building and in or over any public road vested in such gram panchayat.

¶40

(2) If the owner or the occupier of the building proves that any such projection, encroachment or obstruction has existed for a period sufficient under the law of limitation to give any person a prescriptive title thereto or that it was erected or made with the permission or licence of any local authority duly empowered in that behalf, and that the period, if any, for which the permission or licence is valid has not expired, the

¶41

::7::

¶42

gram panchayat shall make reasonable compensation to every person who suffers damages by the removal or alteration of the same.

¶43

Rule(4) of the Andhra Pradesh Gram Panchayats (Protection of Property) Rules, 2011

¶44

4. EVICTION OF ENCROACHMENTS:

¶45

i. Where it is brought to the notice that any property of the Panchayat is under occupation of any persons the Executive authority (Panchayat Secretary) shall serve a notice to the party concerned and give a brief hearing before proceeding for eviction.

¶46

ii. Suitable orders shall be passed by the Executive authority (Panchayat Secretary) before actual eviction takes place.

¶47

iii. The Divisional Panchayat Officer will conduct a monthly review of these cases for protecting Gram Panchayat properties in his jurisdiction through monitoring the process of eviction. He will also give periodical reports to District Panchayat Officer, who will review the cases once in two months.

¶48

iv. The Executive authority (Panchayat Secretary) may take necessary assistance from the police as per section 139 of the Andhra Pradesh Panchayat Raj Act’1994.

¶49

v. The evicted property of the Gram Panchayat shall be protected by making fencing or by constructing a compound wall depending on the value of the property and by displaying a notice board.

¶50

vi. A permanent register on encroachment of Panchayat properties shall be maintained in all Gram Panchayats and the same will be validated in the Gram Sabha and Gram Panchayat meetings at least twice in a year.

¶51

vii. Aggrieved parties may file representations to the Executive authority (Panchayat Secretary) concerned by marking a copy to the Divisional Panchayat Officer.

¶52

viii. The petitions filed by the aggrieved parties will be monitored and disposed of by the Divisional Panchayat Officer / District Panchayat Officer.“

¶53

7. In view of the reasons stated as above, the impugned final show

¶54

cause notice in R.c.No.109/2025, dated 24.02.2026 issued by the 3^rd

¶55

::8::

¶56

respondents is hereby set aside. However, the 2^nd Respondent is hereby directed to consider the explanation dated 03.01.2026 submitted by the petitioner with reference to the patta said to have been granted by the then Mandal Revenue Officer, Kapileswarapuram and after providing an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner and other stakeholder, if any, pass appropriate speaking orders within a period of four (04) weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. After passing a speaking order the 2^nd Respodnent is at liberty to proceed further for removal of encroachments, if any. Till such time, the respondent authorities are restrained to interfere with the possession and enjoyment of the petitioner over the subject land.

¶57

8. With the above directions, the Writ Petition is disposed of. No costs.

¶58

Consequently, miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending in this writ petition shall stand closed.

¶59

DT: 06.03.2026 krk

¶60

_________________________________ VENKATESWARLU NIMMAGADDA, J

¶61

::9::

¶62

HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE VENKATESWARLU NIMMAGADDA

¶63

¶64

W.P.No.6422 of 2026

¶65

DT: 06.03.2026

¶66

krk

Masta Nageswarara Rao v. the State of Andhra Pradesh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Masta Nageswarara Rao 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

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Makineni Venkata Sujatha Vs Eedhara Rathamma

Dalli Bharathi Devi Vs the Government of Andhra Pradesh

B. Mohanamma @ B. Mohana, Vs the State of Andhra Pradesh

M. Nageswara Reddy Vs Peeyush Kumar, IAS

V Siva Sunil Kumar Reddy Vs Sai Prasad IAS

V Sreenivasa Rao Vs the Labour Court