Andhra Pradesh High Court
WP/47598/2018 of Lenka Ramesh Vs The Union of India on 16 June 2026
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH WEDNESDAY, THE SEVENTEENTH DAY OF JUNE TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE RAVI CHEEMALAPATI WRIT PETITION NO: Between: 1. LENKA RAMESH, S/O KANAKA RAO, AGED 40 YEARS, LOCAL OFFICE STREET, TAGARAPUVALASA, BHEEMUNIPATNAM MANDAL,
APHC010990882018
IN TH
WEDNESDA
TWO
THE HONOURA
WR
Between:
1. LENKA RAMESH,
OFFICE
STREET
MANDAL, VISAKHA
1. THE UNION OF IN
ROAD TRANSPOR
BHAVAN, SANASA
2. THE NATIONAL H
DIRECTOR, VIJAYA
3. THE
COMPETEN
COLLECTOR, (LAN
4. THE PROJECT DIR
(GQ),VISAKHAPAT
Petition under Articl
circumstances stated in
pleased to issue writ or o
of WRIT of MANDAMUS
unilateral and illegal Not
E HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRAD
AT AMARAVATI
(Special Original Jurisdiction)
AY,THE SEVENTEENTH DAY OF JU
O THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX
PRESENT
ABLE SRI JUSTICE RAVI CHEEMAL
RIT PETITION NO: 47598/2018
S/O KANAKA RAO, AGED 40 YE
T,
TAGARAPUVALASA,
BHEE
APATNAM DISTRICT.
AND
NDIA, REP BY ITS SECRETARY,
RT AND HIGHWAYS, 5TH FLOOR,
AD MARG ROAD, NEW DELHI -1100
HIGHWAY AUTHORITY OF INDIA,
AWADA, ANDHRA PRADESH.
NT
AUTHORITY
CUM
SPECI
ND ACQUISITION) NATIONAL HIGHW
RECTOR, NATIONAL HIGHWAY AUT
TNAM.
...RES
le 226 of the Constitution of India pra
the affidavit filed therewith, the High
order or direction more particularly o
for declaring the action of 4th Respo
tice of eviction vide NHAI/PIU-VSP/
RC,J
DESH
UNE
LAPATI
EARS, LOCAL
EMUNIPATNAM
...PETITIONER
MINISTRY OF
, TRANSPORT
01.
REP BY ITS
AL
DEPUTY
WAY16.
THORITY, PIU
SPONDENT(S):
aying that in the
h Court may be
ne in the nature
ndent issued an
Notice-Ma Act-
RC,J
2002(13 of 2003)/2018-01/25430 Dated 26.12.2018 and trying to dispossess and demolish the petitioner shop and house situated at Door No 7-44-148 in Sy No 47/2B, Tagarapuvalasa, Bheemunipatanam Mandal, Visakhapatnam District without following any procedure under law as illegal, arbitrary and unconstitutional and contrary Article 14 and21 and 300-A of Constitution of India and consequently direct the Respondents to set aside the 4th respondent impugned Notice vide NHAI/PIU-VSP/ Notice-LandT Act-2002(13
of 2003)/2018-01/25430 Dated 26.12.2018 and further direct the respondent not to interfere with petitioner peaceful possession and ownership of his shop and house situated at Door No 7-44-148 in Sy No 47/2B Tagarapuvalasa, Bheemunipatanam Mandal, Visakhapatnam and pass IA NO: 1 OF 2018
Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to stay the impugned notice of 4th respondent in vide NHAI/PIU-VSP/ Notice- L86T Act-2002 (13 of 2003)/2018-01/25430 Dated 26.12.2018 and further direct the Respondents not to interfere with my peaceful possession shop and house situated at DNo 7-44-148 in Sy No 47/2B Tagarapuvalasa, Bheemunipatanam Mandal, Vialchapatnam, pending disposal of the main writ petition and pass IA NO: 1 OF 2019
Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to vacate the interim directions granted on 28.12.2018 in IA No.1 of 2018 in WP
No.47598 of 2018 and dismiss the writ petition and pass Counsel for the Petitioner:
1.S SRINIVASA RAO
Counsel for the Respondent(S):
1.S S VARMA
2..
3.MUDUNURI ANAND KUMAR (SC FOR NHAI)
RC,J
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
ORDER
This writ petition is filed questioning the notice of eviction vide NHAI/PIU-VSP/Notice-L&T Act-2002 (13 of 2003)/2018-01/25430, dated 26.12.2018 issued by respondent No.4-The Project Director, National Highway Authority PIU (GQ), Visakhapatnam and the action of the authorities in trying to dispossess the petitioner and demolish the shop and house of the petitioner situated in Door No.7-44-148 in Survey No.47/2B, Tagarapuvalasa, Bheemunipatnam Mandal, Visakhapatnam District, being violative of the procedure contemplated under law.
2. The case of the petitioner, in brief, is that the petitioner purchased the subject land, abutting National Highway No.16 in the year 2005 and therein he got constructed house and shops and when the National Highway Authorities tried to interfere with the possession of the petitioner of the subject property with a view to extend the four lane highway into six lanes, the petitioner filed writ petition vide W.P.No.13218 of 2018 and vide orders dated 17.04.2018 this Court passed interim direction that the respondents shall not meddle with the private properties of the petitioner except in accordance with law. Thereafter, in utter defiance of the interim orders, the respondent no.4 issued the impugned notice directing the petitioner to remove the unauthorized access/occupation within seven (07) days and since the said notice was issued even without mentioning the extent of RC,J
encroachment and morevoer without calling for explanation and without giving any opportunity to the petitioner to defend his case the said notice has to be set aside as the same has been issued in utter violation of principles of natural justice.
3. Heard Sri D.Lokeswara Rao, learned counsel, representing S.Srinivasa Rao, learned counsel for the petitioner, and Sri Mudunuri Anand Kumar, learned Standing Counsel for National Highways.
4. Sri D.Lokeswara Rao, learned counsel, while reiterating the contents of the writ affidavit would contend that the impugned notice has been issued in sheer violation of principles of natural justice despite the directions given by this Court in the earlier writ petition that the authorities should follow due process of law and therefore, the impugned notice is liable to be set aside. Accordingly, prayed to allow the writ petition.
5. On the other hand, Sri Mudunuri Anand Kumar, learned Standing Counsel for National Highways, would contend that as the petitioner gained unauthorized access to the National Highway and has been in occupation of site of National Highways, the impugned notice was issued directing the petitioner to remove such unauthorized access/occupation and hence there is no violation of either the principles of natural justice or the directions given by this Court in the earlier writ petitions. He would further contend that there is RC,J
neither impropriety nor procedural irregularity in issuing the impugned notice and the writ petition being meritless deserves dismissal and moreover since the petitioners are encroachers no indulgence need be shown. Accordingly, prayed to dismiss the writ petition.
6. Perused the material available on record and considered the submissions made by the learned counsel for the parties.
7. The material discloses that earlier the petitioner filed writ petition vide W.P.No.13218 of 2018 and therein this Court gave an interim direction to the authorities not to meddle with the private property except in accordance with law. Thereafter, without following the process contemplated under law, the authorities issued the impugned notice directing the petitioner to remove the alleged unauthorized access/occupation within a period of seven (07) days.
8. Further, as rightly contended by the learned counsel for the petitioner, the impugned notice did contain a mandate for removal of unauthorized access/occupation without even mentioning the extent of encroachment. Issuing notice with such a mandate must necessarily be preceded by a show-cause-notice. Admittedly no such show cause notice was issued prior to issuance of the impugned notice. Therefore, there is violation of principles of natural justice.
RC,J
9. In view of the above observations, since there is flagrant violation of principles of natural justice, this writ petition can be disposed of at the admission stage itself without keeping it pending inviting counters, since no explanation, excuse, or counter-argument from them could legally justify their actions.
10. Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of, setting aside the notice of eviction vide NHAI/PIU-VSP/Notice-L&T Act-2002 (13 of 2003)/2018- 01/25430, dated 26.12.2018 issued by respondent No.4-The Project Director, National Highway Authority PIU (GQ), Visakhapatnam. This order does not preclude the authorities in taking steps as per the provisions of the Control of National Highways (Land and Traffic Act), 2002, however strictly in accordance with law. There shall be no order as to costs.
Pending miscellaneous petitions, if any, shall stand closed.
___________________________ JUSTICE RAVI CHEEMALAPATI 17th June, 2026.
RR