ORDER: Heard Sri G.V.S. Kishore Kumar, learned counsel for the petitioners, the learned Government Pleader for Municipal Administration, Sri A. Jagannadha Rao for 1st respondent and Sri Manohar Reddy Mallasani, learned Standing Counsel for respondents 2 and 3. 2. According to the petitioners, all of them hail from most backward class communities and most of them are engaged in the profession of washerman, and they constructed dwelling houses in the year 1970 in the land belonging Roads and Buildings Department with the consent of the said Department. It is further stated that pursuant to the plans approved by 2nd respondent-Municipality, petitioners herein constructed houses and 2nd respondent also assessed the said houses to property tax, and the petitioners have been paying said property tax since 1988, and in addition to the same, the Electricity Department is also supplying power to them. In the writ affidavit, it is further stated that previously, Roads and Buildings Department authorities made a request to the petitioners to hand over certain portions of their residential tenements for formation of Narketpally-Addanki-Medarametla Express Way, connecting Narketpally of Telangana State with Medarametla of Prakasam District of Andhra Pradesh State. It is further stated that the State Government, as a measure of compensation, granted pattas in respect of small extents of land, to all the petitioners and other similarly placed persons whose lands were utilized for the purpose of laying the said road. 3. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioners that totally ignoring all the above ground realities, as if the houses of the petitioners are in the road margins, 2nd respondent herein issued the impugned notices, asking the petitioners herein to vacate the premises within 30 days. It is submitted further by the learned counsel for the petitioners that without being preceded by any show cause notices to the petitioners, the impugned action has been resorted to, and the said action is highly illegal, arbitrary, unreasonable and violative of Articles 14 and 300A of the Constitution of India and violative of the principles of natural justice. 4. On the other hand, strongly resisting the Writ Petition, the learned Standing Counsel for 2nd respondent-Municipality contends that there is no illegality, nor there exists any infirmity, in the impugned action, and in the absence of the same, the impugned action is not amenable to any judicial review under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. 4. On the other hand, strongly resisting the Writ Petition, the learned Standing Counsel for 2nd respondent-Municipality contends that there is no illegality, nor there exists any infirmity, in the impugned action, and in the absence of the same, the impugned action is not amenable to any judicial review under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. It is further submitted by the learned counsel that strictly in accordance with the provisions of the Andhra Pradesh Municipalities Act, 1965, the respondent-Nagara Panchayat authorities are taking action against the encroachments made by the petitioners herein. 5. A perusal of the impugned notices reveals in clear and unequivocal terms that the respondent-Nagar Panchayat authorities did not issue any show cause notices to the petitioners prior to issuing the impugned eviction notices. In the considered opinion of this Court, the same is a patent violation of principles of natural justice. It is also required to be noted that the petitioners herein are claiming long standing possession over the property. Having regard to the submissions of the learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned Standing Counsel for respondent-Nagar Panchayat, without going into merits of the case, this Court deems it appropriate to dispose of the Writ Petition, by directing that the impugned eviction notices dated 11.10.2021 be treated as show-cause notices, and leaving it open for the petitioners herein to submit their objections/explanations, if any, within a period of two weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order, for consideration of the same by the authorities and for passing appropriate orders strictly in accordance with law within a period of four weeks thereafter. It is made clear that till the objections/explanations filed by the petitioners are considered and appropriate orders are passed, status quo as on today with regard to the subject property shall be maintained. It is further made clear that this order would not enure to the benefit of the petitioners, if they fail to submit their objections/explanations within the time indicated supra. No costs as to costs of the Writ Petition. As a sequel, interlocutory applications pending, if any, in the Writ Petition shall stand closed.