Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Andhra Pradesh · body

2025 DAILYLAW 10798 (AP)

GONDU THRINADHULU v. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH

WP/6179/2025 · 2025-07-01

Nyapathy Vijay

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

APHC010123592025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI WEDNESDAY,THE SECOND DAY OF JULY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE NYAPATHY VIJAY WRIT PETITION NO: 6179 OF 2025 Between: 1. GONDU THRINADHULU, S/o Lakshmudu, Aged about 81 years, Permanent resident of Ganipadu Village, Sarubujjili Mandal, Srikakulam District ...Petitioner AND 1. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, Rep by its Principal Secretary, Department of Revenue, Secretariat Buildings, Velagapudi, Amaravati. 2. The State of Andhra Pradesh, Rep by its Principal Secretary, Department of Municipal Administration and Urban Development, Secretariat Buildings, Velagapudi, Amaravati. 3. The District Collector, Srikakulam Town and Srikakulam District. 4. The Srikakulam Municipality, now Municipal Corporation, Rep., by its Commissioner, Srikakulam. 5. The Tahsildar, Srikakulam, Srikakulam Mandal District. 6. Town Planning Officer, Srikakulam Municipal Corporation, Srikakulam Town, Srikakulam District. 7. Assistant City Planner, Srikakulam Municipal Corporation, Srikakulam Town, Srikakulam District. ...Respondent(S): 2 Counsel for the Petitioner: T SREEDHAR Counsel for the Respondent(S): T SREEDHAR,GP FOR MUNCIPAL ADMN URBAN DEV The Court made the following: 3 HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE NYAPATHY VIJAY WRIT PETITION No.6179 of 2025 ORDER: 1. The present Writ Petition is filed to declare the action of the Respondents in taking steps to demolish or pull down the existing semi demolished residential structures owned by the Petitioner in western side Block in addition to eastern side residential premises, which are assessed under Assessment No.1085029248 covered by D.No.2-1-0, Gandhi Nagar, 2-Illissi Puram, Srikakulam District within the Srikakulam Municipal Corporation Limits, Srikakulam District, as illegal and arbitrary. 2. At the time of hearing, learned counsel for the Petitioner seeks permission of the Court to withdrawn the Writ Petition. 3. Permission is accorded. 4. Accordingly, the Writ Petition is dismissed, as withdrawn. 5. No orders as to costs. 6. As a sequel, pending applications, if any, shall stand closed. __________________ NYAPATHY VIJAY, J Date: 02.07.2025 IS 4 HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE NYAPATHY VIJAY WRIT PETITION No.6179 of 2025 Date: 02.07.2025 IS