Vendra Kondala Rao vs The Seshamma Cheruvu Gram ...
2023 Latest Caselaw 4965 AP

         THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE RAVI CHEEMALAPATI

                 WRIT PETITION NO.27212 OF 2023

ORDER:

The case of the petitioners herein is that, the petitioners are the

permanent residents of Seshamma Cheruvu Gram Panchayat, Achanta

Mandal, West Godavari District and the 3rd respondent-tahsildar has

assigned the said lands in favour of the petitioner's mother and issued D-

form patta on 09.12.1993 to an extent of Ac.2.00 cents towards house

site and the State itself got constructed pakka house and provided

electricity and water connection. Similarly, the 2nd petitioner's mother was

also assigned house site patta. As both the assignees have passed away,

the petitioners' became legal heirs and came to possession of the subject

properties.

It is their further case that, the 1st respondent issued notice dated

10.07.2023 to the petitioners stating that they are proposed to take up a

sanctioned drainage construction work starting from the house of one Sri

Chintapalli Ramesh and reaching its end at Seshamma Cheruvu and the

drainage passes through the space in front of the petitioners' house which

is adjacent to the public R & B road and thereby directed the petitioners

to vacate the site, between petitioners' house and the R&B road by

removing trees, plants, ramps and other constructions which according to

the notice are obstructing the drainage work thereby granted two(02)

days time. It is the further case that, the notice warns that action would

be taken under the provisions of A.P.Panchayat Raj Act, 1994 and would

recover the expenses incurred from the petitioners. Aggrieved by the

notice dated 10.07.2023, the petitioners got filed writ petition vide

W.P.No.22700/2023 wherein this Court passed order dated 31.08.2023 by

setting aside the notice dated 10.07.2023 and directed the respondent

authorities to issue proper show cause notice and to invite explanation

and by giving an opportunity of personal hearing and to pass a reasoned

order.

It is further case that, the 3rd respondent has deliberately violated

the order dated 31.08.2023 on the pretext of not receiving the certified

order copy and continued with the work illegally until 05.09.2023. Later,

the 3rd respondent has issued fresh show cause notice dated 12.09.2023

for which, the petitioners including 80 other villagers have submitted

explanation dated 20.09.2023 in person and thereby sent a copy of the

same to 2nd respondent as well as District Collector by way of registered

post. The 1st respondent has received explanation and kept quite for some

time and no further action was taken, and on 10.10.2023, the 1st

respondent-Panchayat Secretary has started digging work without

affording any opportunity of personal hearing to the petitioners and

without passing any orders as directed by this Court in

W.P.No.22700/2023. Further, the 1st respondent has ignored the

mandatory provision of law under Section 94 of A.P.Panchayat Raj Act,

1994 wherein notice has to be issued and an opportunity of personal

hearing has to be provided. In the instant case, though petitioners have

raised objections, no personal hearing was given to the petitioners nor

considered the petitioners explanation. As such filed the present writ

petition.

2. Heard Sri S.D.Rama Chandra Rao, learned counsel for the

petitioner, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Panchayat Raj

and Sri N.Srihari, learned standing counsel for Gram Panchayat.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioners in elaboration submitted

that, this Court vide its order dated 31.08.2023 in W.P.No.22700/2023

has set aside the earlier notice dated 10.07.2023 and thereby directed

the respondent authorities to issue proper show cause notice and to

invite an explanation by giving an opportunity of personal hearing and

to pass a reasoned order. He further submitted that, pursuant to the

order dated 31.08.2023, the Gram Panchayat has issued notice dated

12.09.2023 for which the petitioners has submitted a detailed

explanation and now, the authorities without passing any orders on

the said explanation and without providing an opportunity of personal

hearing, are attempting to continue the drainage work in front of the

petitioners house, contrary to the provisions of A.P.Panchayat Raj Act,

1994. He further contended that, though a contempt case is

maintainable, the present writ petition has been filed for a direction to

implement the earlier orders passed in W.P.No.22700/2023. In

support of his contentions, he relied on the judgment of High Court of

Orissa in W.P.(C).No.34606/2021 and had drawn the attention of this

court to Para No.05 and accordingly prayed to protect the interest of

the petitioners.

4. On the other hand, Sri N.Srihari, learned standing counsel

submitted that, pursuant to the directions of this Court in

W.P.No.22700/2023, the Gram Panchayat has issued a show cause

notice dated 12.09.2023 which is placed on record and has drawn the

attention of this Court to the same, and to the said show cause notice,

the petitioners have submitted their explanation. He further submitted

that, the Gram Panchyat has conducted survey of the subject road and

road margin and after receiving the report, another notice dated

7.10.2023 was also issued thereby asking the petitioners to approach

the Gram Panchayat to produce relevant documents. The said notice

was sent through Registered Post and the postal receipts are placed on

record.

He further submitted that, the authorities are strictly adhering

to the directions of this Court and proceeding with the enquiry but the

petitioners are raising unnecessary allegations against the respondents

and filing several writ petitions with a motive that, no drainage system

should pass through petitioners houses. In fact, the petitioners are

coming in the way of the Gram Panchayat works where the Gram

Panchayat has to provide drainage system in village, under the Act,

1994. Further, no reasons are forthcoming as to why the present writ

petition has been filed, particularly when the authorities are following

the directions of this Court dated 31.08.2023 passed in the earlier writ

petition W.P.No.22700/2023 which clearly shows that, the petitioners

are having malafide intention. He further submitted that, the

authorities are inclined to pass orders on the petitioners' explanation

before laying drainage system. As such prayed to dismiss the writ

petition.

5. Perused the record.

6. It is not in dispute that the, the petitioners got filed

W.P.No.22700/2023 wherein this Court in its order dated 31.08.2023

has allowed the writ petition by setting aside the impugned

proceedings dated 10.07.2023. The operative portion reads as follows:

"Accordingly, the writ petition is allowed setting aside the impugned notice dated 10.07.2023. However, this order does not preclude the concerned Gram Panchayat to take steps in accordance with law by issuing proper show cause notice and inviting explanation and by giving an opportunity of personal hearing and pass a reasoned order and communicate the same to the concerned parties. There shall be no orders as to costs."

7. It is also not in dispute that, a show cause notice dated

12.09.2023 has been issued to the petitioners pursuant to the orders

passed by this Court dated 31.08.2023, for which the petitioners have

submitted their explanation. Later, the 2nd respondent has issued

another notice dated 07.10.2023 wherein the petitioner were asked to

place certain documents. In the said circumstances, the petitioners

cannot find fault with the respondents. However, if at all the

authorities have violated the orders passed by this Court in

W.P.No.22700/2023, the petitioners can file a contempt case, instead

of that, the petitioners are filing several writ petitions and inviting

orders from this Court. There will be no purpose in passing series of

orders in similar lines.

8. The judgment relied by the learned counsel for the petitioners,

reads as follows:

"...5. A writ petition is maintainable to enforce order made in a previous writ petition was view taken in Indrapuri Studio v. State of West Bengal, reported in 2003 (3) Calcutta High Court Notes (CHN) 148. Paragraphs 35 to 37 of the judgment available at 2003 SCC Online Cal 236 are reproduced below.

"35. This writ petition is virtually a petition before this Court for enforcement of the order passed by this Court in the earlier writ petition. A second writ petition for enforcement of the earlier order is very much maintainable.

36. In the case of Bibekananda Mondal v. State of West Bengal, reported in (2003)1WBLR (Cal) 213, this Hon'ble Court specifically held that without initiating a

proceeding for contempt, the Court can quash any order or proceeding done in disregard of such order which may also tantamount to contempt. The relevant portion from paragraph 6 of the said judgment is quoted hereunder:

"6. It is therefore, settled law that the second writ application is maintainable for implementation of an earlier order of the writ Court. This Court must issue proper directions for proper implementation of previous directions. Where there has been an order, the order must be complied with. An act done is wilful disobedience of a Court Order is not only contempt, but also, an illegal and invalid act. The language used in Article 226 of the Constitution of India is couched in comprehensive phraseology and the said Article recognizes a very wide power on the High Courts to remedy injustice wherever it is found."

37. The Supreme Court in the case of Devaki Nandan Prasad v. State of Bihar, reported in AIR 1983 SC 1134, entertained a second writ application under Article 32 of the Constitution of India and passed specific order directing the authority to do what was earlier directed by the Supreme Court on the first writ application."

Enforcement is necessary since the authority has acted in teeth of said order dated 22nd June, 2021, having directed the Collector to help petitioner in the best way possible. The direction was made in petitioner's earlier writ petition, where he prayed for implementing the benefit. The administration not having taken resort to law, of preferring appeal against it, said order has become final and direction made upon the authority, binding. Court is not inclined to enquire as to how initially petitioner's name was included in the beneficiary list. Information had regarding the inclusion was never disputed and cannot now be disputed in the manner resorted to by the authority..."

9. The above judgment is not applicable to the facts of this case.

However, the respondent Gram Panchayat is intending to pass orders

on the petitioners' explanation as directed by this court in

W.P.No.22700/2023 before laying drainage system. There are no valid

grounds raised or urged warranting the interference of this court. The

writ petition is misconceived and devoid of merits and liable to be

dismissed.

Accordingly, the writ petition is dismissed. No costs.

Miscellaneous applications, pending if any, shall stand closed.

________________________ JUSTICE RAVI CHEEMALAPATI 13.10.2023, Note: C.C by two days BRS