Telanakula Suresh Babu vs State Of Andhra Pradesh,
2022 Latest Caselaw 9287 AP

     IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH: AMARAVATI

  HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRASHANT KUMAR MISHRA, CHIEF JUSTICE
                                         &
               HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE D.V.S.S. SOMAYAJULU

                 WRIT PETITION (PIL) No.186 OF 2022

                          (Through physical mode)
Telanakula Suresh Babu,
S/o. Srinivasa Rao, Aged about 53 years,
Occ: Advocate, R/o D.No.9-51, Library Street,
Parchur village and Mandal,
Bapatla District (Old Prakasam)                              ..Petitioner
                                   Versus
The State of Andhra Pradesh,
Rep. by its Principal Secretary to Government,
Panchayat Raj and Rural Development Department,
Secretariat, Velagapudi, Amaravati,
Guntur District and others.
                                                            ...Respondents

ORAL ORDER Dt:05.12.2022

(per Prashant Kumar Mishra, CJ)

This writ petition in the nature of public interest litigation has

been preferred seeking the following relief:

"...pleased to issue a writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of WRIT OF MANDAMUS

a. Declaring the action of the respondents in not considering my representations dated 10.02.2022, 07.02.2022, 08.02.2022, 12.04.2022 for removal of encroachments made on the public street which is called as Sri Vasavi Kanyaka Parameswari Devasthanam street and remove the unauthorized occupation and statutes erected unauthorizedly on the

said public street as illegal, irregular, contrary to the provisions of Andhra Pradesh Panchayat Raj Act, 1994 and rules framed there under and offends Articles 14 and 21 of Constitution of India.

b. Consequently, direct the respondents to remove the encroachments, unauthorized constructions, unauthorized statues on the public street Sri Vasavi Kanyaka Parameswari Devasthanam street and pass..."

2. We have heard the learned counsel for the parties and perused the

material available on record.

3. The issue of encroachment of government lands/public utility lands

vested in the State, which are meant for common benefit of individuals,

was considered in detail by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Jagpal Singh

v. State of Punjab reported in (2011) 11 SCC 396, while dealing with

a case of encroachment of village pond. In the said judgment, the

Hon'ble Supreme Court, having noted its earlier decisions in M.I.

Builders (P) Ltd. v. Radhey Shyam Sahu reported in 1999 (6) SCC

464; Friends Colony Development Committee v. State of Orissa

reported in 2004 (8) SCC 733 and Hinch Lal Tiwari v. Kamala Devi

reported in AIR 2001 SC 3215 (followed by the Madras High Court in L.

Krishnan v. State of Tamil Nadu [2005 (4) CTC 1 Madras]), issued

the following directions as contained in paragraph 22 of the judgment,

which reads thus:

"22. Before parting with this case, we give directions to all the State Governments in the country that they should prepare schemes for eviction of illegal/unauthorized occupants of Gram Sabha/Gram Panchayat/Poramboke/ Shamlat land and these must be restored to the Gram Sabha/Gram Panchayat for the common use of villagers of the village. For this purpose, the Chief Secretaries of all State Governments/Union Territories in India are directed to do the needful, taking the help of other senior officers of the Governments. The said scheme should provide for the speedy eviction of such illegal occupant, after giving him a show cause notice and a brief hearing. Long duration of such illegal occupation or huge expenditure in making constructions thereon or political connections must not be treated as a justification for condoning this illegal act or for regularizing the illegal possession. Regularization should only be permitted in exceptional cases e.g. where lease has been granted under some Government notification to landless labourers or members of Scheduled Castes/Scheduled Tribes, or where there is already a school, dispensary or other public utility on the land."

4. It is to be noted that pursuant to the aforesaid directions issued by

the Hon'ble Supreme Court, the State Government of Andhra Pradesh

framed the Andhra Pradesh Gram Panchayats (Protection of Property)

Rules, 2011 (for short, 'the Rules of 2011'), notified vide G.O.Ms.No.188,

Panchayat Raj & Rural Development (Pts.IV) Department, dated

21.07.2011. The said Rules provide for the procedure to be followed for

protection of Gram Panchayat properties and eviction of encroachments.

5. Despite the directions of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Jagpal

Singh (supra) as noted above and despite framing the Rules of 2011, no

steps are taken by the authorities of the Gram Panchayat to protect the

Gram Panchayat lands from encroachment, and similarly, no steps are

being taken by the Government and its authorities in protecting the

government lands. As the public authorities are failing in their duties in

protecting the government lands, which are meant for the common use of

general public, despite bringing to their notice, public spirited persons are

approaching this Court to intervene and direct the public authorities to

protect the government lands from encroachments.

6. In identical matters i.e., W.P (PIL) No.140 of 2022 and batch,

which were filed alleging inaction of the State and its authorities in

protecting the government lands of different classifications, viz., tank

land/grama kantham/burial ground/forest land/road margin/play

ground/cart track/hill poramboke/coastal areas/grazing land etc., this

Court placing reliance on the aforesaid judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme

Court and the Andhra Pradesh Gram Panchayats (Protection of Property)

Rules, 2011, issued the following directions:

(i) The executive authority, i.e., Panchayat Secretary,

of the respective Gram Panchayats in the State shall identify

the Gram Panchayat lands, which are unauthorizedly

occupied/encroached, and take steps for removal of such

encroachments by issuing notice and providing opportunity

of hearing to the unauthorized occupants/encroachers in

terms of the procedure prescribed in Rules of 2011. This

complete exercise shall be done within a period of six

months from today.

(ii) So far as the encroachments over the lands

concerning the Municipalities/Forest Department/Revenue

Department are concerned, even if no separate Rules have

been framed prescribing the procedure to be followed in the

matter of removal of encroachments over those lands, the

officials of the concerned Departments, i.e., the

Departments of Municipal Administration, Forest and

Revenue, shall also undertake and complete the

exercise of identification of unauthorized

occupations/encroachments over the lands belonging to

their respective Departments, within a period of two months

from today, and thereafter, take steps for removal of such

encroachments by following the principles of natural justice,

i.e., issuing notice and providing opportunity of hearing to

the unauthorized occupants/ encroachers, within a further

period of four months.

7. In view of the fact that the encroachments alleged in the present

writ petition are over the public road and following the directions issued

in the similar matter i.e. in W.P. (PIL) No.140 of 2022 and batch, we

deem it appropriate to direct respondent authorities to undertake and

complete the exercise of identification of unauthorized

occupations/encroachments over the subject land within a period of two

months from today, and thereafter, take steps for removal of such

encroachments by following the relevant rules and the principles of

natural justice, i.e., issuing notice and providing opportunity of hearing to

the unauthorized occupants/ encroachers, within a further period of four

months.

8. With the above direction, the Writ Petition (PIL) is allowed. No

costs. Pending miscellaneous applications, if any, shall stand closed.

PRASHANT KUMAR MISHRA, CJ D.V.S.S. SOMAYAJULU, J Ksp