Private Rights Must Yield To Public Interest: Andhra Pradesh High Court Directs Removal Of Encroachments On Public Road

"Private rights, if any, shall yield to Public Interest," Andhra Pradesh High Court, in a significant ruling, held that private rights must yield to the larger public interest in matters concerning the encroachment of public pathways and roads.

A single-judge bench of Justice Gannamaneni Ramakrishna Prasad observed that no individual has a right to obstruct a public way, noting that such encroachments create a 'bottle-neck' effect that causes immense inconvenience to the general public.

The matter reached the High Court through a Writ Petition filed by an aggrieved resident, R P Kousalya, whose access to her plot in LIC Colony, Adoni, was restricted due to temporary sheds constructed on a 33-foot-wide layout road. The petitioner sought a Writ of Mandamus declaring the inaction of the municipal and revenue authorities in removing these encroachments as illegal and violative of Article 300-A of the Constitution of India.

The primary legal issue before the Court was whether the authorities were duty-bound to remove encroachments on a public layout road and whether the encroachers were entitled to alternative accommodation as a condition precedent for their eviction.

Encroachment On Public Property Obstructs Planned Development

The Court observed that the encroachment on the 33-foot wide layout road had reduced the effective width of the road to approximately 10 to 15 feet. This reduction was found to be causing significant hurdles for the movement of vehicles and restricting access to the petitioner’s property.

"Encroachment of public property undoubtedly obstructs and upsets planned development, ecology and sanitation. Public property needs to be preserved and protected. It is but the duty of the State and local bodies to ensure the same," the Court remarked while emphasizing the statutory duty of municipal bodies to maintain public spaces.

No Absolute Right To Alternative Accommodation Before Ejectment

During the proceedings, the Standing Counsel for the Adoni Municipality submitted that the Commissioner had requested the Tahsildar to explore the possibility of allotting alternate sites to the inhabitants of the temporary sheds. However, the Court took a stern view of this approach, stating that the law does not support such a stand.

The bench noted that promising alternate sites to encroachers as a rule would only serve to embolden prospective encroachers and prove detrimental to the public interest. The Court relied on the Supreme Court's decision in Ahmedabad Municipal Corporation Vs. Nawab Khan Gulab Khan (1997) to reinforce that there is no universal application of the principle that alternative accommodation must be provided before ejectment.

"Normally, the court may not, as a rule, direct that the encroachers should be provided with an alternative accommodation before ejectment when they encroached public properties," the bench observed, quoting the Apex Court.

Procedural Fairness and the Principle of Natural Justice

While the Court maintained that no one has a right to encroach upon public property, it acknowledged that if authorities allow encroachers to remain in settled possession for a long time, a "modicum of reasonable notice" for removal is necessary. The Court clarified that while recent encroachments might not require a tedious hearing process, older settlements deserve a notice period of ten days to two weeks.

The bench explained that such a notice period meets the requirements of fairness and provides an opportunity for the encroachers to remove the structures voluntarily. However, the Court was clear that upon resistance, the authorities are well within their rights to use reasonable force to clear the public land.

"The removal of encroachment needs urgent action... The longer the delay, the greater will be the danger of permitting the encroachers claiming semblance of right to obstruct removal," the Court noted.

Final Directions to the Authorities

In its final order, the Court directed the Adoni Municipality to issue a Show Cause Notice to the encroachers, granting them ten days to two weeks to dismantle and remove the structures. If the encroachers fail to vacate voluntarily, the official respondents have been directed to clear the layout road within four weeks using reasonable force if necessary.

The Court concluded by stating that since it has directed the issuance of Show Cause Notices, the order does not violate the principles of natural justice. The entire 33-foot wide road must be made available for public use within a total period of five weeks.

Date of Decision: 04 May 2026