1 APHC010156332025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3328] WEDNESDAY, THE TWENTY THIRD DAY OF APRIL TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE GANNAMANENI RAMAKRISHNA PRASAD WRIT PETITION NO: 8448/2025 Between: 1. SATTI PARVATHI, W/O.VEERREDDY, AGED 60 YEARS, OCC HOUSE WIFE, RESIDENT OF DOOR NO. 5-73, SATTI BASIVI REDDY STREET, AARAVILLI STREET, ATTILI MANDAL, WEST GODAVARI DISTRICT, ANDHRA PRADESH. ...PETITIONER AND 1. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP BY ITS PRINCIPLE SECRETARY, PANCHAYATH RAJ DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT, VELAGAPUDI, AMARAVATI, GUNTUR DISTRICT. 2. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, WEST GODAVARI DISTRICT AT BHIMAVARAM. 3. THE PUBLIC GRIEVANCE REDRESSAL SYSTEM PGRS, WEST GODAVARI DISTRICT AT BHIMAVARAM. 4. THE REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER, WEST GODAVARI DISTRICT AT TADEPALLIGUDEM. 5. THE DISTRICT PANCHAYATH OFFICER, WEST GODAVARI DISTRICT AT BHIMAVARAM. 6. THE TAHSILDAR, ATTILI MANDAL, ATTILI, WEST GODAVARI DISTRICT. 7. THE PANCHAYATH SECRETARY, AARAVALLI GRAM PANCHAYAT, AARAVALLI VILLAGE, ATTILI MANDAL, WEST GODAVARI DISTRICT. 8. THE MANDAL SURVEYOR, ATTILI MANDAL, ATTILI, WEST GODAVARI DISTRICT. 2 9. THE STATION HOUSE OFFICER, ATTILI POLICE STATION, ATTILI VILLAGE AND MANDAL WEST GODAVARI DISTRICT ...RESPONDENT(S): Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. THAMBI PRATTIPATI 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: ORAL ORDER: Heard Sri Thambi Prattipati, learned Counsel for the Writ Petitioner appearing online, Sri P. Rajesh Kumar, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Panchayat Raj, Sri T. Sanjeeva Rao, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue and Sri Srinivas Chaitanya, learned Counsel appearing for the Respondent No.5. 2. Sri Srinivas Chaitanya, learned Counsel appearing for the Respondent No.5 has submitted the Written Instructions furnished by the Panchayat Secretary dated 20.04.2025. Copy of it is not supplied to the Counsel for the Writ Petitioner because he is appearing online. The said Written Instruction is taken on record. 3. The Written Instruction would indicate that for the time-being, there is no proposal either for laying of cement road or for the clearance of the encroachments. It is also stated in the Written Instruction that in the future, if there is any such proposal, either for laying of cement road or for removal of encroachments or for construction of a drainage, the Competent Authority would follow the due process of law. 3 4. Having taken note of the facts, as mentioned in the Written Instructions, this Court deems it appropriate to dispose of this Writ Petition, at the admission stage, without going into the merit, directing the Official Respondents to follow the due process of law if any coercive steps are sought to be initiated against the Writ Petitioner, in the future. 5. With these observations and directions, this Writ Petition stands disposed of. No order as to costs. 6. Interlocutory Applications, if any, stand closed in terms of this order. ______________________________________ GANNAMANENI RAMAKRISHNA PRASAD, J Dt: 23.04.2025 Vns