APHC010165162022 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) TUESDAY. THE TWENTY NINETH DAY OF JULY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE GANNAMANENI RAMAKRISHNA PRASAD WRIT PETITION NO: 10519 OF 2022 Between: Gadi Lakshmi, W/o. Nookaraju Hindu, House wife age 48 years, R/o. D.No. 1. 4-21, Ramalayam street Kotananduru Mandal, East Godavari District. K.E. Chinnaipalam- 533407. 2. Vemula Naga Ratnam, W/o. late Kondala Swamy age about 75 years Hindu, House Wife, R/o. D.No. 4-21,Ramalayam street Chinnaipalam- 533407. Kotananduru Mandal, East Godavari District. K.E. ...Petitioners AND 1. State of Andhra Pradesh, rep. by its Secretary, Panchayatraj Department Secretariat, Velagapudi, Amaravati, Guntur Dist and others. The District Collector, East Godavari District, Kakinada-533001. The Mandal Development Officer, Kotananduru Mandal, Kotananduru- 533407. East Godavari District. The Grampanchayat, K.A.Mallavaram (v) rep. by its Secretary. Vemula Appala Konda, S/o. Late Kannayya aged 65 years, cultivation, R/o. D. No.5-40, Water tank street, Kotananduru Mandalam, East Godavari District. 2. 3. 4. 5. K.A. Mailavaram-533407. ...Respondents Petition under Article 226 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, Order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the in action of the respondents 2 to 4 as against the complaint of the petitioners Dt.29-12-2021 and allowing the 5th respondent to make illegal constructions occupaying the red gravel road in R.S.No.133/4 vested to grampanchayat K.A.Mallavaram (v) and preventing the access of the petitioners from their houses to the CC road situated towards south and vice versa and in violation of the provisions of the A.P.Panchayat Raj Act 1994 and contrary to the building rules as illegal, arbitrary and violative of the principles of natural justice and consequently direct the respondents 2 to 4 to take immediate action against the illegal constructions of the 5*^ respondent and restore the 14' width red gravel road for the access of the petitioners and other residents in the vicinity. lA NO: 1 OF 2022 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 grant interim order of direction directing the respondents 2 to 4 to stop all further illegal constructions being undertaken by the 5‘^ respondent in the existing 14' width red gravel road in R.S.No.133/4 of K.A.Mallavaram gram panchayat of Kotananduru Mandal, in violation of the provisions of the A.P.Panchayat Raj Act 1994 and contrary to the building rules pending disposal of the main writ petition. lA NO: 2 OF 2022 Between; Vemula Appala Konda, S/o. Late Kannayya aged 65 years, cultivation, R/o. D. No.5-40, Water tank street, K.A. Mallavaram-533407. Kotananduru Mandalam, East Godavari District. ...Petitioner/Respondents AND 1. Gadi Lakshmi, W/o. Nookaraju Hindu, House wife age 48 years, R/o. 4-21, Ramalayam street, Kotananduru Mandal, East Godavari District. D.No. K.E. Chinnaipalam- 533407. 2. Vemula Naga Ratnam, W/o. late Kondala Swamy age about 75 years Hindu, House Wife, R/o. D.No. 4-21,Ramalayam street, Chinnaipalam- 533407. Kotananduru Mandal, East Godavari District. K.E. ...Writ Petitioners/Respondents 3. State of Andhra Pradesh, rep. by its Secretary, Panchayatraj Department Secretariat, Velagapudi, Amaravati, Guntur Dist and others. 4. The District Collector, East Godavari District, Kakinada-533001. 5. The Mandal Development Officer, Kotananduru Mandal, Kotananduru- 533407. East Godavari District. 6. The Grampanchayat, K.A.Mallavaram (v) rep. by its Secretary. ...Respondents 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 vacate the stay granted in WP. 10519/2022 dated 27-04-2022. Counsel for the Petitioners: SRI SRINIVASA RAO PAPPU Counsel for the Respondent Nos.1 & 2 :GP FOR PANCHAYAT RAJ & ^ RURAL DEVELOPMENT Counsel for the Respondent Nos.3 & 4 : SRI P. CHAITANYA FOR SRI Y. KOTESWARA RAO, SC FOR GRAM PANCHAYAT Counsel for the Respondent No.5 : SRI A. RADHAKRISHNA The Court made the following order: IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH : AMARAVATI **** WRIT PETITION No. 10519 OF 2022 Between: 1.GADI LAKSHMI, W/0 NOOKARAJU HINDU, HOUSE WIFE AGE 48 YEARS, CHINNAIPALAM- GODAVARI DISTRICT. R/0 D.NO. 4-21,RAMALAYAM STREET, 533407. K.E. KOTANANDURU MAN DAL, EAST 2.VEMULA NAGA RATNAM, W/O LATE KONDALA SWAMY AGE R/0 D.NO. 4- K.E. CHINNAIPALAM- 533407. ABOUT 75 YEARS, HINDU, HOUSE WIFE, 21,RAMALAYAM STREET, KOTANANDURU MANDAL, EAST GODAVARI DISTRICT. ...PETITIONER(S) AND ESTATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP, BY ITS SECRETARY, PANCHAYATRAJ DEPARTMENT SECRETARIAT, VELAGAPUDI, AMARAVATI, GUNTUR DIST AND OTHERS. 2.THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, EAST GODAVARI DISTRICT, KAKIN ADA-533001. 3.THE MANDAL DEVELOPMENT OFFICER, KOTANANDURU MANDAL, KOTANANDURU-533407. EAST GODAVARI DISTRICT. 4.THE GRAMPANCHAYAT, K.A.MALLAVARAM (V) REP. BY ITS SECRETARY. 5.VEMULA APPALA KONDA, S/0 LATE KANNAYYA AGED 65 YEARS, CULTIVATION, R/0 D. NO.5-40, WATER TANK STREET, K.A. MALLAVARAM-533407. GODAVARI DISTRICT. KOTANANDURU MANDALAM, EAST ...RESPONDENT(S): ii 2 DATE OF JUDGMENT PRONOUNCED: 29.07.-2025 SUBMITTED FOR APPROVAL: THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE G. RAMAKRISHNA PRASAD Whether Reporters of Local Newspapers may be allowed to see the judgment? Whether the copies of judgment may be marked to Law Reporters / Journals? Whether His Lordship wish to see the fair copy of the Judgment? 1. No 2. /No 3. Yes / Ni / 3 A * THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE G. RAMAKRISHNA PRASAD + WRIT PETITION No.10519of 2022 % 29.07.2025 Between: 1.GADI LAKSHMI, W/0 NOOKARAJU HINDU, HOUSE WIFE AGE 48 R/0 D.NO. 4-21, RAMALAYAM STREET, KOTANANDURU MANDAL, EAST K.E. YEARS CHINNAIPALAM- 533407. GODAVARI DISTRICT. AGE 2.VEMULA NAGA RATNAM, W/0 LATE KONDALA SWAMY R/0 D.NO. 4- ABOUT 75 YEARS, HINDU, HOUSE WIFE 21,RAMALAYAM STREET KOTANANDURU MANDAL, EAST GODAVARI DISTRICT. K.E. CHINNAIPALAM- 533407. ...PETITIONER(S) AND 1.STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP. BY ITS SECRETARY, PANCHAYATRAJ DEPARTMENT SECRETARIAT, VELAGAPUDI, AMARAVATI, GUNTUR DIST AND OTHERS. 2.THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, EAST GODAVARI DISTRICT, KAKIN ADA-533001. 3.THE MANDAL DEVELOPMENT OFFICER, KOTANANDURU MANDAL, KOTANANDURU-533407. EAST GODAVARI DISTRICT. 4. THE GRAM PAN CHAYAT, K.A.MALLAVARAM (V) REP. BY ITS SECRETARY. 5.VEMULA APPALA KONDA, S/O LATE KANNAYYA AGED 65 YEARS, CULTIVATION, R/0 D. NO.5-40, WATER TANK STREET, K.A. MALLAVARAM-533407. KOTANANDURU MANDALAM, EAST GODAVARI DISTRICT. ...RESPONDENT(S); : Sri Srinivasa Rao Pappu, learned Counsel for the Writ Petitioners ! Counsel for Petitioner 1 4 Sri P.Chaitanya appearing Sri Y.Koteswara Rao, learned Standing Counsel for the Gram Panchayat and Sri A.Radha Krishna, learned Counsel for the Unofficial Respondent No.5 learned Counsel behalf Counsel for Respondents : of on < Gist: > Head Note: ? Cases referred: APHC010165162022 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3328] TUESDAY,THE TWENTY NINETH DAY OF JULY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE GANNAMANENI RAMAKRISHNA PRASAD WRIT PETITION NO: 10519/2022 Between: 1.GADI LAKSHMl, W/0 NOOKARAJU HINDU, HOUSE WIFE AGE 48 R/0 D.NO. 4-21,RAMALAYAM STREET, KOTANANDURU MAN DAL, EAST K.E. YEARS, CHINNAIPALAM- 533407. GODAVARI DISTRICT. 2.VEMULA NAGA RATNAM, W/0 LATE KONDALA SWAMY AGE R/0 D.NO. 4- K.E. CHINNAIPALAM- 533407. ABOUT 75 YEARS, HINDU. HOUSE WIFE, 21,RAMALAYAM STREET. KOTANANDURU MANUAL, EAST GODAVARI DISTRICT. ...PETITIONER(S) AND ESTATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP. BY ITS SECRETARY. PANCHAYATRAJ DEPARTMENT SECRETARIAT. VELAGAPUDI, AMARAVATI, GUNTUR DIST AND OTHERS. 2. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, EAST GODAVARI DISTRICT, KAKIN ADA-533001. 3.THE MANUAL DEVELOPMENT OFFICER, KOTANANDURU MANUAL, KOTANANDURU-533407. EAST GODAVARI DISTRICT. 4. THE GRAMPANCHAYAT, K.A.MALLAVARAM (V) REP. BY ITS SECRETARY. 5.VEMULA APPALA KONDA, S/0 LATE KANNAYYA AGED 65 YEARS, CULTIVATION, R/0 D. NO.5-40, WATER TANK STREET, K.A. 2 MALLAVARAM-533407. GODAVARI DISTRICT. KOTANANDURU MANDALAM EAST ' ...RESPONDENT(S): Counsel for the Petltioner(S): 1.SRINIVASA RAO PAPPU Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1.A RADHAKRISHNA I 2.Yarraguntla.Koteswara Rao,Standing Counsel For Zilla Parishads,Mandal Praja Parishads and Gra 3.GP FOR PANCHAYAT RAJ RURAL DEV The Court made the following ORAL ORDER: Praja Heard Sri Srinivasa Rao Pappu, learned Counsel for the Writ Petitioners appearing on behalf of the Gram Panchayat and Unofficial Respondent No.5. appearing online; Sri P.Chaitanya, learned Counsel Sri Y.Koteswara Rao, learned Standing Counsel for Sri A.Radha Krishna, learned Counsel for the 2. The present Writ Petition is filed seeking the following relief: issue JwfnT'’ ^7"" ot 7Zif 7m u one in the nature of Wnt of Mandamus declaring the in action of the respondents 2 to 4 as against the complaint of the petitioners Dt 29-12-2021 and aihwmg the 5th respondent to make iliegai constructions occupying KAZir T .esfed to Grampanchayat K A.Matiavaram (v) and preventing the access of the petitioners from their houses to the CC road situated towards south and vice AcZlotT 7 ot® A.P.Panchayat Raj violative of the pnncptes of natural Justice and consequently direct the respondents 2 to 4 to take immediate constructions of the 5th respondent and gravel road for the access of the petitioners and other residents In the vicinity and grant such other relief or reliefs as this Honhie Court may deem fit and proper under the facts and circumstances of the case and in the interests ofJustice. action against the illegal restore the 14' width red 3 T‘ 3. The Writ Petitioner No.1 is the daughter of the Writ Petitioner No.2. The Writ Petitioner No.2 is the wife of one late Sri V.Kondala Swamy. It is the case of the Writ Petitioners that the husband of the Writ Petitioner No.2 has acquired the subject property by virtue of family partition that was effected 40 years ago between himself and sons of his elder brothers viz., Sri Vemula Shram Murthy, Vemula Appala Konda; that in the said partition each of the person got an extent of Ac.0.32 cents in R.S.No.133/4; and, that during the partition, all the coparceners have agreed to leave 14 feet road from the existing road running from West to East, as it was thought that without leaving such road, the partition between the parties would not be meaningful. It is further submitted that the 5*^ Respondent who was a coparcener in the partition started digging the extent of 14 feet road with a view to prevent the right of access of the Writ Petitioners from the CC Road. Learned Counsel for the Writ Petitioners has drawn the attention of this Court to the Adangal issued from the website on 05.04.2022 indicating that Sri Vemula Kondala Swamy is the owner and enjoyer of the extent of Ac.0.32 cents in Sy.No. 133/4. Learned Counsel for the Writ Petitioners has also drawn the attention of this Court to the Registered Will executed by Sri Vemula Kondala Swamy in favour of the Writ Petitioner No.1 (daughter) dated 24.03.2006 (Ex.P3) which indicates that an extent of Ac.0.32 cents in Sy.No.133/4 is given to his daughter (Writ Petitioner No.1). 4. 5. At the stage of admission, vide Order dated 27.04.2022, this Court had passed an Interim Order directing the Respondent Nos. 3 and 4 not to permit the 5*^ Respondent to take up any illegal construction. The Unofficial Respondent No.5 one Sri Vemula Appala Konda, has filed Counter-Affidavit on 26.07.2022 along with an application for vacating the Interim Order passed by this Court dated 27.04.2022 bearing I.A.No. 02 of 2025. 6. Sri A.Radha Krishna, learned Counsel appearing for the Unofficial Respondent No.5 has drawi'kfhe attention of this Court to the contents of the 4 Counter-Affidavit. The Unofficial Respondent No.5 has denied the fact that the ^ Writ Petitioner No.1 has inherited an extent of Ac.0.32 cents through the partition effected by her father. In Para No. 11 of the Counter Affidavit, the Unofficial Respondent No.5 had stated that the Writ Petitioners herein, in collusion with one Sri Vemula Sriram Murthy, Vemula Varahala Babu and Vemula Kumari got a suit filed bearing O.S.No.8 of 2022 on the file of Additional Junior Civil Judge’s Court, Tuni for relief of declaration and consequential permanent injunction against the Unofficial Respondent No.5 and one Sri Kalla Krishna. It is submitted that in the said suit (O S.No.8 of 2022) Sri V.Sriram Murthy with two others have also filed I.A.No.5 of 2022 for the relief of temporary injunction, which was dismissed upon contesting and it is stated that the Unofficial Respondent is making construction in his own site. It is contended by the Unofficial Respondent No.5 that in view of the pendency of O.S.No.8 of 2022 and also in view of the dismissal of I.A.No.5 of 2022 which is filed seeking temporary injunction, this Court should not entertain the present Writ Petition. It is also submitted that the Writ Petitioners have not approached this Court with clean hands in as much as the Writ Petitioners have concealed the material facts such as the pendency of O.S.No.8 of 2022 and dismissal of I.A.No.5 of 2022, in the said suit vide Order dated 23.03.2022. 7. Learned Counsel for the Unofficial Respondent No.5 would further submit that the present Writ Petition is not maintainable in as much as the dispute is purely of the civil nature and that the issues between the Writ Petitioners and the Unofficial Respondent No.5 are pending on the file of Additional Civil Judge (Junior Division), Tuni. Learned Counsel for the Unofficial Respodnent would submit that if the Writ Petitioners are seeking any relief in respect of the subject land, the appropriate forum would be the Civil Court in which the suit is already pending. It is submitted that the Writ 8. 5 Petitioner Nos.1 and 2 are arrayed as Defendant Nos. 4 and 3 respectively and the Unofficial Respondent No.5 is arrayed as the Defendant No.1. 9. Learned Counsel appearing for the Unofficial Respondent No.5 would also submit that if there is any dispute between the Writ Petitioners and the Unofficial Respondent No.5, it would be appropriate for the Writ Petitioners to initiate suitable proceedings before the Trial Court in as much as the Writ Petitioners as well as the Unofficial Respondent No.5 are also arrayed as parties in the suit filed by one Sri Vemula Shram Murthy and others. This Court has noticed that the cause title in I.A.No.5 of 2022 would indicate that the father of the Unofficial Respondent No.5 herein is also the father of Sri Vemula Shram Murthy and that the Unofficial Respondent No.5 herein and the Writ Petitioners are arrayed as defendants in O.S.No.8 of 2022. 10. Learned Counsel for the Unofficial Respondent No.5 would further submit that the findings rendered by the learned Additional Civil Judge (Junior Division), Tuni are against the Writ Petitioners herein to the effect that the Writ Petitioners have not been able to establish any case. 11. This Court has considered the averments, as noted above. As it can be seen from the affidavit filed in support of the Writ Petition, the Writ Petitioners have not made even a whisper with regard to the pending civil suit bearing No. O.S.No.8 of 2022 on the file of the learned Additional Civil Judge (Junior Division), Tuni. It is the contention of the learned Counsel for the Respondents that the said subject land does not belong to the Writ Petitioner No.l’s father and therefore, through the Registered Will executed by the father of Writ Petitioner No.1, no title can be passed in favour of the Writ Petitioner No.1. 12. ) Having considered the above submissions, this Court is of the considered opinion that the issue agitated by the Writ Petitioners is not only 13. civil in nature but there is also a pending suit bearing O.S.No. 8 of 2022 on the ^ file of the learned Additional Civil Judge (Junior Division), Tuni that deals with the same subject land. This Court is therefore of the opinion that the Writ Petition is not the appropriate legal remedy when a suit touching upon the same subject matter is already pending. Similarly, during the pendency of the suit, it is inappropriate for the parties in the said suit to approach the Writ Court that may cause considerable impact on the pending suit proceedings. This apart, this Court has noticed that the Writ Petitioners have a whisper, atleast for completion of facts that a civil suit is already pending. As stated earlier, non disclosure of the material facts would i not even made suggest falsehood since the Writ Petitioners are admittedly the parties (Defendants) in the civil suit bearing O.S.No. 8 of 2022 on the file of the learned Additional Civil Judge (Junior Division), Tuni. 14. In the light of the above facts, the present Writ Petition is devoid of any merit besides being an abuse of process in as much as the Writ Petitioners have not disclosed the pendency of O.S.No.8 of 2022 on the file of the learned Additional Civil Judge (Junior Division), Tuni. 15. With these observations and directions dismissed. No order as to costs. this Writ Petition stands 16. Interlocutory Applications, if any, stand closed in terms of this order. Sd/- K. TATA RAO DEPUTY REGISTRAR //TRUE COPY// SECTION OFFICER One Fair Copy to the HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE GANNAMANENI. (For His Lordship’s kind perusal) RAMAKRISHNA PRASAD To, 1. One CC to Sri Srinivasa Rao Pappu, Advocate [OPUC] 2. One CC to Sri A. Radhakrishna, Advocate [OPUC] 3. One CC to Sri Y. Koteswara Rao, SC for Gram Panchayat [OPUC] 4. Two CCs to GP for Panchayat Raj & Rural Development, High Court of Andhra Pradesh [OUT] 5. 9 L.R. Copies. 6. The Under Secretary Union of India, Ministry of Law, Justice & Company Affairs, New Delhi. 7. The Secretary, A.P. High Court Advocates Association, High Court of A.P. at Amaravati, Guntur District. 8. Two CD Copies Cnr HIGH COURT DATED:29/07/2025 L.R. COPIES. ORDER WP NO. 10519 OF 2022 DISMISSING THE W.P WITHOUT COSTS