Andhra Pradesh High Court quashed the writ petition filed to stop the demolition of Petitioner’s House
The Andhra Pradesh high court in a writ petition judgement relied on the statement of the respondent and disallowed the writ filed by the petitioner to stop the demolition of his house. Petitioner’s house bearing No.4-135 in R.S.No.94 to an extent of Ac.0.04 cents situated at Laksmaneswaram Village, Narasapuram Mandal, West Godavari District, was planned for demolishment accounting to illegal construction as submitted by the respondents. The petitioner submitted that this action was taken without giving any notice and it is violation of principle of natural justice and the process of law.
The case of the petitioner is that the petitioner owns & possesses a house bearing number No.4-135 constructed in the land to an extent of Ac.0.04 cents in R.S.No.94 situated at Laksmaneswaram Village, Narasapuram Mandal. The land has been held by his ancestors and he acquired the property through succession. The grandfather of the petitioner constructed a thatched house and resided there and after that, the family of the petitioner constructed a house with RCC roofed sheets. The petitioner also submits that he is paying house tax to Respondent No.5. And has an electricity connection. The issue arose when the Revenue and Gram Panchayat authorities came to the house of the petitioner on 25.02.2021 and took measurements for conducting the survey. Later on the petitioner was informed that they are going to construct Rythubarosa Centre in the said land and directed him to vacate the house but the petitioner requested respondent No.4 not to dispossess them by showing house tax and electricity tax receipts, but the respondents did not consider the request of the petitioner. Again on 06.03.2021, the Revenue and Panchayat Authorities again came there with police constables along with bulldozers and other machinery to demolish the house of the petitioner but did not demolish the same after the petitioner requested them to follow the procedure of law.
Against the submissions of petitioners the Respondent filed a counter affidavit stating that the land in an extent of Ac.0.04 cents in R.S.No.94 was classified as Canal and the petitioner illegally raised a thatched house and small shed with asbestos sheets. The house number mentioned in the affidavit belongs to Koppanathi Subbaraju, but not belongs to the petitioner. Also it was further mentioned that the petitioner recently removed the said thatched house and commenced the construction of pakka building with pillars. And when the Gram Panchayat noticed the same they informed the petitioner not to make any permanent construction without permission from the gram panchayat.
Then immediately, the petitioner approached this Court with apprehension that the illegal constructions made by the petitioner without any permission may be demolished by the respondents. However, in the Counter Affidavit, respondent No.5 averred that the gram panchayat intended to issue notice to the petitioner and they follow the procedure for removal of the encroachments.
After hearing to both the sides of the party the court recorded the statement of the 5th respondent and considering the averment made in the Counter Affidavit by the respondent that they intended to issue notice to the petitioner and to follow the procedure for removal of encroachments the court decided that this Writ Petition can be disposed of recording the statement of respondent No.5 to meet the interest of justice. Accordingly, the court quashed the Writ Petition directing the respondents to follow due process of law if they intend to remove the encroachments, if any, made by the petitioner.
“This Article Does Not Intend To Hurt The Sentiments Of Any Individual Community, Sect, Or Religion Etcetera. This Article Is Based Purely On The Authors Personal Views And Opinions In The Exercise Of The Fundamental Right Guaranteed Under Article 19(1) (A) And Other Related Laws Being Force In India, For The Time Being. Further, despite all efforts that have been made to ensure the accuracy and correctness of the information published, Legal Xpress shall not be responsible for any errors caused due to human error or otherwise.”