Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Andhra Pradesh · body

2014 DAILYLAW 1689 (AP)

Jammaitul Khuresh v. State of Andhra Pradesh, Rep. by its Principal Secretary,

WP/476/2014 · 2026-07-21

Challa Gunaranjan, Lisa Gill

body2014

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

APHC010603992014 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI WRIT PETITION NO: 476 of 2014 Bench Sr.No:-59 [3584] Jammaitul Khuresh ...Petitioner Vs. State Of Andhra Pradesh Rep By Its Principal Secretary and Others ...Respondent(s) ********** Advocate for Petitioner: Mr. G. Ronald Raju Advocate(s) for Respondent(s): Mr. A. S. C. Bose (SC for Municipal Corporations) – R3 CORAM : THE CHIEF JUSTICE LISA GILL SRI JUSTICE CHALLA GUNARANJAN DATE : 22nd July 2026 LISA GILL, CJ: Prayer in this writ petition is for setting aside order dated 12.07.2013, passed by learned Upa-Lokayukta directing Commissioner, Eluru Municipal Corporation, to remove walls constructed by closing the road and submit compliance report within one month. 2. Learned counsel for petitioner – Jammaitul Khuresh (Muslim Butchers Association) submits that impugned order directing Commissioner to remove walls is illegal and without jurisdiction. 2 wp_476_2014 3. It is alleged that private respondent Nos.5 and 6 intended to construct an apartment in place of one demolished Dal Mill with a view to enhance market value of said property. They tried to lay a road therefrom to reach main road directly by demolishing compound walls of slaughterhouse located on northern and southern sides, on several occasions. When members of petitioner Association intervened, efforts were made by private respondents to fabricate some records to show that a road existed earlier in slaughterhouse area. 4. P.L.C. No.1439 of 2012 was filed by unofficial respondent Nos.5 and 6 before District Legal Services Authority, Eluru, West Godavari, without impleading petitioner Association. Objections were filed. Respondent No.3 filed counter before District Legal Services Authority stating that claim of unofficial respondent Nos.5 and 6 is incorrect and not in consonance of ground realities, upon which proceedings were closed on 04.01.2013 by Secretary, District Legal Services Authority. 5. Thereafter, private respondent No.5 filed a complaint before learned Upa-Lokayukta leading to passing of order, dated 12.07.2013, without impleading writ petitioner as party even though members of Association have been in full control of slaughterhouse. Objection petition was filed before learned Upa-Lokayukta. Respondent No.3 filed report, dated 07.12.2012, categorically admitting that Sy. No.1767 was classified as slaughterhouse in the year 1940. Subsequently, said Sy. No. was subdivided into sub-division No.1767/2. 3 wp_476_2014 6. Pursuant to passing of impugned order, dated 12.07.2013, staff of respondent No.3 demolished northern and southern walls of slaughterhouse, Madhepally. 7. Learned counsel for respondent No.3, while referring to written instructions received from respondent No.3, points out that walls in question stood demolished prior to filing of writ petition. As on date, schedule property is lying vacant and is covered with bushes and there is no wall, shed, or any permanent or temporary structure existing thereon. Land adjacent to slaughterhouse is classified as Government Poramboke land and is earmarked for construction of road. Area though earmarked for road in the year 1939 has never been used as a public road by civil body. Inhabitants of surrounding locality have independent access to their respective houses from other existing roads and are not dependent of subject land for ingress or egress thereto. It is thus submitted that present writ petition is rendered infructuous. 8. Learned counsel for petitioner is unable to verify factum of entire land lying vacant as on date, as has been submitted on behalf of official respondents. 9. Be that as it may, it is undeniable that impugned order, dated 12.07.2013, whereby a specific direction has been given by learned Upa- Lokayukta to Commissioner, Eluru Municipal Corporation, to take action as is detailed therein is not sustainable. However, keeping in view present status of 4 wp_476_2014 area in question as placed before us by learned counsel for official respondents, this writ petition is disposed of as infructuous at this stage. Petitioner is at liberty to avail remedies in accordance with law in case of any infraction as may be in future. No costs. Pending miscellaneous applications, if any, shall stand closed. LISA GILL, CJ CHALLA GUNARANJAN, J akn Whether the order is Speaking/Reasoned : Yes / No Whether the order is Reportable : Yes / No 5 wp_476_2014 HON’BLE MRS.JUSTICE LISA GILL, CHIEF JUSTICE & HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE CHALLA GUNARANJAN Writ Petition No: 476 of 2014 DATE : 22.07.2026 AKN 76