Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Andhra Pradesh · body

2025 DAILYLAW 11304 (AP)

KADAPALAYA GARI NARAYANA REDDY v. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH

WP/6789/2025 · 2025-03-19

Gannamaneni Ramakrishna Prasad

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

APHC010129542025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3328] WEDNESDAY, THE NINETEENTH DAY OF MARCH TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE GANNAMANENI RAMAKRISHNA PRASAD WRIT PETITION NO: 6789/2025 Between: 1. KADAPALAYA GARI NARAYANA REDDY, S/O. KADAPALAYA GARI GANGIREDDY, AGED ABOUT 68 YEARS, OCC R/O.D.NO.3-169, MALLEMVARIPALLI, VATHALUR POST PULLAMPET MANDAL, ANNAMAYYA DISTRICT ...PETITIONER AND 1. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, PANCHAYAT RAJ DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT, ANDHRA PRADESH. 2. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, PANCHAYAT RAJ DEPARTMENT, RAYACHOTY, ANNAMAYYA DISTRICT, A.P. 3. THE SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, RAYACHOTY, ANNAMAYYA DI,STRICT, A.P. 4. THE JOINT COLLECTOR, RAJAMPET, ANNAMAYYA DISTRICT. A.P. 5. THE TAHSILDAR, PULLAMPETA MANDAL, ANNAMAYYA DISTRICT, A.P. 6. THE PANCHAYAT SECRETARY, VATHALUR GRAM PANCHAYATH, PULLAMPET MANDAL, ANNAMAYYA DISTRICT, A.P. 7. MR NELLOLLA ESWARAIAH, S/O.VENKATESH, R/O.EDIGAPALLI VILLAGE, VATHALUR POST, PULLAMPET MANDAL, ANNAMAYYA 2 DISTRICT, A.P. 8. G VENKATESH, S/O.YELLAIAH, R/O.EDIGAPALLI VILLAGE, VATHALUR POST, PULLAMPET MANDAL, ANNAMAYYA DISTRICT, A.P. ...RESPONDENT(S): Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. BALAIAH B Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. GP FOR PANCHAYAT RAJ RURAL DEV 2. GP FOR HOME 3. GP FOR REVENUE The Court made the following: Heard Sri B. Balaiah, learned Counsel for the Writ Petitioner and Sri Panku Rajesh Kumar, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Panchayat Raj, Sri T. Sanjeeva Rao, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue & Home and Sri Vidya Sagar, learned Counsel appearing on behalf of Sri Sudhir Mattegunta, learned Standing Counsel for Gram Panchayat. 2. The relief sought in the Writ Petition is as under: “it is prayed that this Hon’ble Court may be pleased to issue an appropriate Writ, Order or Direction, more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus, declaring the action of the respondents in trying to demolish the petitioner’s house i.e., RCC building, bearing D.No.3/169, assignment No. 1430, (Electricity Meter No.000682), situated at Mallemvaripalli Village, Vathalur Panchayat, Pullampet Mandal, Annamayya District, A.P., without any reason or cause, as illegal, arbitrary, capricious and violation of the principles of natural justice, and consequently direct the Respondents not to take any coercive steps for demolishing the petitioners i.e., RCC house building, bearing D.No.3/169, assignment No. 1430, (Electricity Meter No.000682), situated at Mallemvaripalli Village, Vathalur 3 Panchayat, Pullampet Mandal, Annamayya District, A.P., and pass such other relief or reliefs as this Hon’ble Court deems fit and proper in the circumstances of the case.” 3. It is submission of the learned Counsel for the Writ Petitioner that the Unofficial Respondent Nos.7 and 8 have been instigating the Official Respondents to interfere with the peaceful possession and enjoyment of the subject property belonging to the Writ Petitioner. 4. Sri T. Sanjeev Rao, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue, has drawn the attention of this Court to the contents of the Affidavit filed in support of this Writ Petition and would submit that no case has been made out against the Official Respondents in the Affidavit and therefore, the Writ Petition is not maintainable. 5. This Court has perused the contents of the Affidavit and noticed that the averments in the Affidavit which is filed in support of the Writ Petition are bereft of any allegations against the Official Respondents. 6. In this view of the matter, this Court is of the opinion that the dispute, if any, is between the Writ Petitioner and the Unofficial Respondent Nos. 7 and 8, and therefore, the Writ Court would not entertain such Writ Petition filed seeking relief against the Unofficial Respondents. 7. Accordingly, this Writ Petition is dismissed. No order as to costs. 8. Interlocutory Applications, if any, stand closed in terms of this order. ______________________________________ GANNAMANENI RAMAKRISHNA PRASAD, J Date: 19.03.2025 DSV