THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY WRIT PETITION No.1981 of 2011 Dated 02nd February, 2011 Between: Vuyuri Raghavamma …Petitioner And The Kanuru Gram Panchayat, rep.by the Panchayat Secretary, Kanuru, Penamaluru Mandal, Krishna District …Respondent Counsel for the petitioner: Sri V.R.Avula Counsel for respondent: Sri G.Elisha The Court made the following: ORDER: This writ petition is filed for a mandamus to set aside proceedings, dated 25.01.2011, of the respondent, whereby it has called upon the petitioner to remove the construction, which was allegedly raised in deviation of the sanctioned plan. I have heard Sri V.R.Avula, learned counsel for the petitioner, and Sri G.Elisha, learned Standing Counsel for the respondent. A perusal of the impugned proceedings, which are styled as notice, shows that the petitioner has been constructing a building without leaving the setbacks and occupying the road margin. The petitioner was therefore called upon to remove the offending structures within six days. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the impugned order is vitiated by non-observance of principles of natural justice, as the respondent cannot unilaterally come to the conclusion that the petitioner has indulged in violation without giving the latter an opportunity of being heard. I find force in this submission of the learned counsel. The impugned proceedings do not refer to a prior notice issued to the petitioner. Unless proper notice was issued to the petitioner and the objections, if any, filed by her are considered, the respondent cannot unilaterally come to the conclusion that the petitioner has violated the approved plan. In this view of the matter, the parties are directed to treat the impugned proceedings as show-cause notice. The petitioner is permitted to file her objections within a period of three weeks from today. Within two weeks of receipt of such objections, if any, from the petitioner, the same shall be considered, a reasoned order shall be passed by the respondent and communicated to the petitioner. Till this exercise is completed, the respondent shall not interfere with the construction already made by the petitioner. However, the petitioner shall not raise further construction till the order referred to above is passed. Subject to the above directions, the writ petition is disposed of. As a sequel to disposal of the writ petition, W.P.M.P.No.2421 of 2011 filed by the petitioner for interim relief is disposed of as infructuous. C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY, J 02nd February, 2011 VGB