Seelam Palleswara Rao, vs The State Of Andhra Pradesh,
2022 Latest Caselaw 1322 AP

       THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE R.RAGHUNANDAN RAO

                      WRIT PETITION No.6416 of 2022
ORDER:-
                    The petitioner claims ownership and possession of

over an extent of Ac.0.04 cents in Sy.No.188 of Chebrolu

Revenue Village, Ungutur Mandal, West Godavari District. The

petitioner contends that the said land has been possession and

ownership of his family for many years and he had constructed

a shed in the said land 20 years back and he is paying the

electricity charges for the connection given by the electricity

department since then.

         2.         The petitioner has now received notices dated

19.02.2022 and 22.02.2022 calling upon the petitioner to

remove the shed and vacate the premises on the ground that the

activities of the petitioner in the said land are causing drainage

water, sullage and filth to be inducted into the irrigation canal

on the banks of which the present land is situated.


         3.         The petitioner submits that the said notice is invalid

as the notice seeks to dislodge the petitioner from the Gram

Kantam land.

         4.         M/s. Nimmagadda Revathi, learned counsel for the

petitioner would submit that Grama Kantam land cannot be

treated as a government land and relies upon on the judgment

of     the    erstwhile     of   High   Court   of   Andhra   Pradesh   in

Smt Sagadapu Vijaya Vs. The State of Andhra Pradesh1.




1
    2015 4 ALD 88
                                  2




      5.    In course of the hearing the petitioner has also

placed a notice dated 09.03.2022 said to have been served on

the petitioner. In this notice, the petitioner is called upon to

immediately vacate the premises failing which a criminal case

would be filed against the petitioner.

      6.    Sri I.Koti Reddy, learned Standing Counsel for Gram

Panchayat, on instructions, submits that the petitioner's land

on the edge of the irrigation canal and sewage water and filth

are being thrown into the irrigation canal by the petitioner

which is causing immense pollution and is also resulting in

blockage of the free flow of water. These facts were raised by the

irrigation department and consequently, the Gram Panchayat

had taken steps for clearing the structures on the canal bank.

He would further submit that the petitioner is not the owner of

the land, as the said land is a Gram Kantam belonging to the

Gram Panchayat.

      7.    Without    going   into   the   facts   which   are   in

controversy, it is apparent that the petitioner has to be given an

opportunity of hearing to set out his case before the Gram

Panchayat, before any action is taken against the petitioner. Any

other course of action would result in violation of the principles

of natural justice.

      8.    In the circumstances, this writ petition is disposed

of with a direction to the respondents not to take any action

against the petitioner except in accordance with law. This would

mean that the respondents shall not take any action against the

petitioner without giving the petitioner an adequate opportunity

of hearing and passing orders, with reasons, after such an

opportunity is given to the petitioner. For this purpose, the

petitioner shall submit his objections and material before the

Grama Panchayat within a period of two weeks from today.

There shall be no order as to costs.

Miscellaneous petitions, pending if any, in this Writ

Petition shall stand closed.

___________________________________ JUSTICE R.RAGHUNANDAN RAO Date : 15-03-2022 BSM

THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE R.RAGHUNANDAN RAO

WRIT PETITION No.6416 of 2022

Date : 15-03-2022

BSM