THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE A.V. SESHA SAI WRIT PETITION No.20500 of 2009 Between:
1. Madupu Lakshmanachari and others.
PETITIONERS AND
1. Aswaraopet Gram Panchayat, rep. by its Executive Authority-cum-Panchayat Secretary, Aswaraopet Village, Aswaraopet Mandal, Khammam District, and others.
RESPONDENTS ORDER:
This writ petition, filed under Article 226 of the constitution of India, challenges the order passed by the 2nd respondent-Panchayat Secretary, Aswaraopet Gram Panchayat, Khammam District, vide proceedings Rc.No.123/2008, dated 6.11.2008.
2. Heard Sri Nimmagadda Satyanarayana, learned counsel for the petitioners, Sri P. Raghavender Reddy, learned Standing Counsel for respondents 1 and 2 and Sri Kowturu Vinaykumar, learned counsel for the 3rd respondent, apart from perusing the material available on record.
3. Though a number of contentions have been raised by the petitioner, the principal contention is that the 2nd respondent-Panchayat Secretary without issuing any notice and without giving any opportunity of being heard to the petitioner, passed the impugned order dated 6.11.2008 deleting the names of the petitioners from the relevant Gram Panchayat records as owners in respect of the shop rooms bearing D.Nos.8-150/1, 8-150/2 and 8-150/3.
4. Responding to the Rule Nisi issued by this Court, a counter affidavit has been filed on behalf of the respondent-Gram Panchayat denying the averments in the affidavit filed in support of the writ petition and in the direction of justifying the impugned action. But there is no answer for the specific averment in the writ petition that the 2nd respondent did not issue any notice inviting objections before passing the impugned order. It is also pleaded in the writ affidavit that the said action is in violation of the principles of natural justice. The learned counsel for the 3rd respondent vehemently contends that there is no illegality in the impugned order and the 2nd respondent acted strictly in accordance with law.
5. It is a settled and well established principle of law that no person shall be condemned unheard and any action, having civil consequences, must be preceded by notice and opportunity of being heard to the persons likely to be affected. In the present case, the material before this Court manifestly shows that such aspect is given a go by. Therefore this Court is of the considered opinion that the impugned action is liable to be declared as illegal and arbitrary on the said solitary ground of violation of principles of natural justice.
6. For the aforesaid reasons, the writ petition is allowed, setting aside the order dated 6.11.2008 and the matter is remanded to the 2nd respondent for fresh consideration after giving notice and opportunity of being heard to all the persons, who are likely to be affected, including the petitioners and the 3rd respondent herein. The petitioners and the 3rd respondent are permitted to file the material in support of their respective claims before the 2nd respondent within a period of one month from the date of receipt of a copy of this order, thereupon, respondents 1 and 2 shall pass appropriate orders by considering the entire material before them and pass appropriate orders within a period of three months thereafter. Till then status quo obtaining as on today shall be maintained by all the stake holders. No costs.
JUSTICE A.V. SESHA SAI.
6th November, 2014 Js.