APHC010120452025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH ATAMARAVATI - (Special Original Jurisdiction) ^ THURSDAY, THE SEVENTEENTH DAY OF JULY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE HARINATH.N WRIT PETITION NO: 6369 OF 2025 Between: \ ■ Yeduru Sanyasi Rao, S/o. Mutyalu, Male, aged 70 years, Occ; Ex-Chairman of Village Pollution Protection Committee, R/o. D.No.70-1-4E, Mandi, Pedagantyada, Visakhapatnam Town, Visakhapatnam District. ...Petitioner u-" AND 1. The State of Andhra Pradesh, Rep. by its the Principal Secretary, Development, Secretariat, A^rr^nistration Municipal Amaravathi, Guntur District. 2. The District Collector, Visakhapatnam, Visakhapatnam District. 3. The Commissioner and Director, Municipal Administration, VaddeswaraYfC Andhra Pradesh. 4. The Great Visakhapatnam Municipal Corporation, Rep. by its Zonal Commissioner, Visakhapatnam. Visakhapatnam District, i--' 5. The Assistant City Planner, Zone - bt, GVMC, Visakhapatnam District. 6. P Chandra Kala, W/o. Poll Naidu, Female, aged 28 years, Occ: House wife, R/o. D. No.70-^4/2, Mulagada, Yeduruvanipalem Village, Visakhapatnam District. and Urban ...Respondents Petition under Article 2^ of the Constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased to issue a WRIT OF MANDAMUS declaring the inaction of the respondents in did not to demolish the house property under construction vide Building permit No.1086/5350/BZ5/GUM/2023, dated 05-12-2023 issued though online DPMS and follow the letter No.SWC/1086/2023/2755, dated 06-01-2024 to STOP the construction of 6‘^ Respondent by 5*'' respondent without following Provision of Andhra Pradesh Municipalities Act, 1965, without following procedure as illegal, improper, unjust, arbitrary, violative of Article 300-A and 14, 21 ofjttie Constitution of India liable to set aside the ORDERS under Section 452(20 and 461(20 of APMC Act, 1955 and under Section 86, 89 (3) of APMR and UDA Act, 2016, dated 06-01-2024. lA NO: 1 OF 2025 Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the writ petition, the High Court may be pleased to direct to 5‘^ Respondent take necessary action to demolish the property i.e., house property of 6*^ Respondent which is illegal construction respectively in Yedhuruvanipem Village Visakhapatnam District under Municipal Act, 1965, pending disposal of the above Writ Petition. Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI REDDY VENKATA RAMANA Counsel for the Respondent Nos.1 to 3 : GP FOR MUNICIPAL ADMN AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT Counsel for the Respondent Nos.4 & 5 : SRI A.S.C. BOSE, SC FOR GVMC Counsel for the Respondent No.6 : NONE APPEARED The Court made the following order: \ APHC010120452025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3457] THURSDAY,THE SEVENTEENTHDAY OF JULY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE HARINATH.N WRIT PETITION NO: 6369/2025 Between: 1.YEDURU SANYASI RAO,, S/0. MUTYALU, MALE, AGED 70 YEARS, OCC EX-CHAIRMAN OF COMMITTEE VISAKHAPATNAM TOWN, VISAKHAPATNAM DISTRICT. VILLAGE POLLUTION PROTECTION PEDAGANTYADA, R/0. D. NO.70-1-4E, MANDI ...PETITIONER AND 1.THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP. BY ITS THE PRINCIPAL MUNICIPAL ADMINISTRATION AND URBAN SECRETARIAT, AMARAVATHI SECRETARY, DEVELOPMENT, DISTRICT. GUNTURU 2.THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, VISAKHAPATNAM, VISAKHAPATNAM DISTRICT. 3.THE COMMISSIONER AND DIRECTOR, MUNICIPAL ADMINISTRATION, VADDESWARAM, ANDHRA PRADESH. 4.THE GREAT VISAKHAPATNAM MUNICIPAL CORPORATION, REP. VISAKHAPATNAM. BY ITS ZONAL COMMISSIONER, VISAKHAPATNAM DISTRICT. 5.THE ASSISTANT CITY PLANNER, ZONE - 58, GVMC, VISAKHAPATNAM DISTRICT. 6.P CHANDRA KALA, W/0. POLL NAIDU, FEMALE, AGED 28 YEARS R/0. D. NO.70-1-34/2, MULAGADA, OCC HOUSE WIFE, YEDURUVANIPALEM VILLAGE, VISAKHAPATNAM DISTRICT. ...RESPONDENT(S): 2 / Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. REDDY VENKATA RAMANA Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1.ADDL ADVOCATE GENERAL 2.GP MUNCIPAL ADMN AND URBAN DEV AP The Court made the following: 3 ORDER:- The petitioner is aggrieved by the inaction on the part of respondent Nos.4 and 5 in demolishing the construction undertaken by the 6^'" respondent. It is submitted that a STOP order was issued to the 6**^ respondent on 06.01.2024, as it was found that the 6*^ respondent was constructing a house abutting the boundary wall of the Defense Estate. It is submitted that a no objection certificate from the Defense Estate Officer would have to be obtained before undertaking any construction. 2. The learned Standing Counsel appearing for respondent Nos.4 and 5 submits that the government has issued G.O.Ms.No.4, dated 09.01.2025. It is submitted that as per the said G.O., a no-objection certificate is not required from the Defense Estate Officer and also submits that on written instructions, the Defense Authority conducted inspections with regard to the construction undertaken on the land abutting the boundary wall of the Defense Estate and In view of these 3. no objection was raised by the Defense Estate Officer, considerations, this Court is not inclined to interfere. Accordingly, the Writ Petition is dismissed. There shall be no order as 4. to costs. ■r 4 As a sequel, miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shall stand closed. Sd/- M PRABHAKAR RAO //TRUE COPY// assistant^GISTRAR ^SECTION OFFICER To, 1. One CC to Sri Reddy Venkata Ramana, Advocate [OPUC] 2. One CC to Sri A.S.C. Bose, SC for Municipality (OPUC) 3. Two CCs to GP for Municipal^Admn and Urban Development, High Court of AP Advocate [OPUC] 4. Two CD Copies Cnr HIGH COURT DATED:17/07/2025 ORDER WP NO. 6369 OF 2025 DISMISSING THE W.P. WITHOUT COSTS