IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH :: AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) WEDNESDAY, THE EIGHTH DAY OF JANUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE V.SUJATHA WRIT PETITION NO: 8757 OF 2023 j ‘t..- 5 3 % V; C7 Between: Aditya Educational Institutions, Represented by its Vice Chairman Sri. N.K. Deepak Reddy Srinagar, Kakinada Godavari District) Andhra Pradesh Kakinada District, (erstwhile East ...PETITIONER AND 1. The State of Andhra Pradesh, Rep by its Principal Secretary, Administration and Urban Development Secretariat Buildings Velagapudi Guntur District, Andhra Pradesh 2. The District Collector, Kakinada District Kakinada-533001 Andhra Pradesh 3. The Kakinada Municipal Corporation, Rep by its Commissioner Kakinada, Kakinada District, Andhra Pradesh. Municipal ...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 an appropriate writ more in the nature of Writ of Mandamus deciaring the action of the Respondent Kakinada Municipai Corporation in not taking any action pursuant to the representation dated 02.03.2023 made by the Petitioner for unauthorized and illegal encroachers from the No. 3 Commissioner evicting the 40 feet wide road which is the only access to the Petitioners material at Petitioners land at LP No. 153/1991 1101.66 land for transporting construction in T.S.No.128, admeasuring r, Suryaraopeta; sq. yards situated at Sambamurthy Naga Kakinada, Andhra Pradesh Articles 14, 21 and 300-A of the Constitution as being arbitrary, illegal and violative of India apart from being in Act, 1995 and consequently direct the Respondents to 02.03.2023 and issue proper in the of utter violation of the Andhra Pradesh Municipal Corporation the Rules framed thereunder and consider the representation of the Petitioner dated such other writ or order or direction as deemed fit and circumstances of case. lA NO: 1 OF 20?.? Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court pleased to direct the Respondent No. 3 Commissioner, Kakinada Corporation to evict the encroachers from the 40 feet may be Municipal road on the Southern side of the property belonging to the Petitioner-Institution viz., LP No.153/1991 in T.S.No.128, admeasuring 1101.66 sq. yards situated at Sambamurthy Nagar, Suryaraopeta, Kakinada, Andhra Pradesh, pending writ petition and issue such other writ or order or direction as deemed fit and proper in the circumstances of case. Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI MATHUKUMILLI SRI VIJAY Counsel for the Respondent No.1: GP FOR MUNICIPAL ADMINISTRATION AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT Counsel for the Respondent No.2: GP FOR REVENUE Counsel for the Respondent No.3:SRI M. KRISHNA RAO SC FOR MUNICIPAL CORPORATIONS The Court made the following: ORDER APHC010171422023 M IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3333] r WEDNESDAY ,THE EIGHTH DAY OF JANUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE V.SUJATHA WRIT PETITION NO: 8757/2023 Between: ...PETITIONER Aditya Educational Institutions AND ...RESPONDENT(S) The State Of Andhra Pradesh and Others Counsel for the Petitioner: 1.SRI VIJAY MATHUKUMILLI Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1 .M Krishna Rao SC for ski vzm kkd Municipal Corporations 2.GP FOR MUNCIPAL ADMN URBAN DEV 3.GP FOR REVENUE The Court made the following: ORDER: The present Writ Petition came to be filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking the following relief:- “...to issue an appropriate writ more in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the Respondent No. 3, Commissioner, Kakinada Municipal Corporation in not taking any action pursuant to the representation dated 02.03.2023 made by the Petitioner for evicting the unauthorized and illegal encroachers from the 40 feet wide road which is the only access to the Petitioners land for transporting construction material at Petitioners land at LP No. 153/1991 in T.S.No.128 admeasuring 1101.66 sq yards situated at Sambamurthy Nagar, Suryaraopeta, Kakinada, Andhra Pradesh as being arbitrary, illegal and violative of Articles 14, 21 and 300-A of the Constitution of India apart from being in utter violation of the Andhra Pradesh Municipal Corporation Act, 1995 and the Rules framed thereunder and consequently direct the Respondents to consider the representation of the Petitioner dated 02.03.2023 and pass...” 2. The brief facts of the case are that the petitioner is an educational institution aiding from schooling to degree and is also running an Engineering College. Thereafter, the petitioner has acquired an extent of 1101.66 Sq.yards situated at Sambamurthy Nagar, Suryaraopet, Kakinada vide document No.2592 of 2023 dated 01.03.2023 in an auction conducted by the Bank. Subsequently, the petitioner institution has started constructing hostel. But, as the said property was purchased in an auction, the physical boundaries were not marked and also there is a 40 feet road in the southern side of the plot, which is the only access for the main lane. As the said road was encroached by the petitioner’s institution submitted a representation dated 02.03.2023, to the respondent No.3 requesting to evict the encroachers. But no action was taken by the respondent No.3. some unauthorized persons 3. The main grievance of the petitioner is that in a similar situation, when the adjacent property in L.P.No.362/82 has been encroached by the same unauthorized persons, the owner of the said property filed W.P.46310 of 2016, wherein this Court vide its order dated 29.12.2016 disposed of the writ petition by directing the concerned respondents therein to take necessary action. But as no action has been taken by the concerned respondents therein, another writ petition vide W.P.No.27189 of 2022 was filed and this Court vide its order dated 16.09.2022, ordered for the appearance of the respondent No.3- Commissioner herein along with the records and subsequently, the alleged encroachments in the property in L.P.No.362/82, were removed by the respondent-commissioner. The main grievance of the petitioner is that though the issue of the petitioner institution falls within the same ambit, the respondent No.3 is not taking any action on the representation dated 02.03.2023, submitted by the petitioner. Aggrieved by the same, the petitioner filed the present writ petition. 4. Heard Sri M.Vijay learned counsel for the petitioner, learned Government Pleader for Municipal Administration and Urban Development appearing for the respondent No.1, learned Government Pleader for Revenue appearing for the respondent No.2, Sri M.Krishna Rao, learned Standing Counsel appearing for the respondent No.3 and perused the material available on record. 5. Today when the matter came up for hearing, learned Standing Counsel appearing for the respondent No.3 has furnished a copy of instructions dated 08.01.2025, issued by the Commissioner, Municipal Corporation, Kakinada, wherein it is stated that in pursuance of the representation made by the petitioner, the Town Surveyor was deputed to conduct survey and to submit report and accordingly, the Town Surveyor of Kakinada Municipal Corporation had conducted and submitted the following report: “The site measuring 1101.66 Square Yards of Plot Nos.1, 2 and 11 are related to “A” Block of LP.No.114/88 which was approved by the erest while Kakinada Municipality and the above site of 1101.66 Square Yards bearing Plot Nos. 1, 2 and 11 are bounded by 2 roads one on the East side with the width of 33 feet with road connectivity and another 40 feet wide road on the south side which is encroached by encroachers since long back and erected huts prior to the layout proposals. ” 6. It is further stated in the instructions that necessary action will be taken by the respondent authorities to remove the encroachments in due process I after providing alternative sites to the encroachers by the Revenue Department. But, however, the instructions does not clarify as to whether in pursuance to the complaint dated 02.03.2023, submitted by the petitioner, any action has been initiated by the respondent authorities in removing the encroachments either by giving notices to the encroachers or by evicting them. 7. On a perusal of the instructions submitted by the learned Standing Counsel, it can be seen that pursuant to the complaint made by the petitioner, though the Town Surveyor had submitted his report by stating that the 40 feet wide road on the south side of the petitioner’s plot was encroached by certain encroachers since long back and had also erected huts prior to the layout proposals, no action has been initiated by the respondent authorities in removing the encroachments by evicting the encroachers from the subject land. I I In view of the same, when it is an admitted fact that there are encroachments in the 40 feet wide road on the Southern side of the petitioner’s land, instead of keeping the writ petition pending, this Court feels it appropriate to dispose of the writ petition by directing the respondent Nos.2 & 3 to initiate appropriate action as against the encroachers by following due process of law, but, however, the respondents shall also make sure to provide alternative sites to the said encroachers. The said process shall be completed within a period of six (06) months from the date of receipt of a copy of the order. 9. With the above direction, the Writ Petition is disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs. 8. Miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, in this Writ Petition shall stand closed. Sd/- M SRiNIVAS ASSISTANT REGISTRAR //TRUE COPY// SOTION OFFICER To, 1. The Principal Secretary, Municipal Administration and Urban Development, State of Andhra Pradesh, Secretariat Buildings, Velagapudi, Guntur District, Andhra Pradesh 2. The District Collector, Kakinada District, Kakinada-533001, Andhra Pradesh 3. The Commissioner, Kakinada Municipal Corporation, Kakinada, Kakinada District, Andhra Pradesh. 4. One CC to Sri Mathukumilli Sri Vijay, Advocate [OPUC] 5. One CC to Sri M. Krishna Rao, SC for Municipal Corporations[O PUC] 6. Two CCs to GP for Municipal Administration and Urban Development, High Court of Andhra Pradesh. [OUT] 7. Two CCs to GP for Revenue, High Court of Andhra Pradesh. [OUT] 8. Three CD Copies. ssb If HIGH COURT DATED:08/01/2025 ORDER WP.No.8757 of 2023 DISPOSING OF THE W.P. WITHOUT COSTS