APHC010182112025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3460] WEDNESDAY,THE NINTH DAY OF APRIL TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE NYAPATHY VIJAY WRIT PETITION NO: 9313/2025 Between: Addepalli Vidyavathi, ...PETITIONER AND The State Of A P and Others ...RESPONDENT(S) Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. MSVS SUDHA RANI Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. GP MUNCIPAL ADMN AND URBAN DEV AP The Court made the following: 2 THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE NYAPATHY VIJAY WRIT PETITION No. 9313 of 2025 ORDER: 1. The present Writ Petition is filed to declare the Provisional Order dated 12.03.2025 vide Notice No.34/1028/TNL/UC/2025 issued by the Respondent No.2 specifying the violations in the construction made by the Petitioner pursuant to the building permission No.1028/0220/B/TNL/nzp/2021, dated 27.09.2021 as illegal and arbitrary. 2. The case of the Petitioner is that she is the owner of a four storeyed building bearing door No.1-31-11, Yadlapalli Vari Street, Nazerpet, Tenali, Guntur District and the same was constructed as per the sanctioned building plan. Earlier, the Respondent No.5 filed O.S.No.493 of 2021 seeking injunction restraining the Petitioner from proceeding with the construction and the said suit is pending. Subsequently the Respondent No.5 filed a suit O.S.No.539 of 2021 against the husband and son of the Respondent No.5 and no interim orders were passed against the Petitioner from proceeding with the construction. Thereafter, the Respondent No.5 filed W.P.No.34274 of 2022 for a direction to stop the construction being made contrary by the petitioner. 3 However, the same was dismissed by this Court. Thereafter, a Writ Appeal W.A.No.245 of 2023 was filed by the Respondent No.5 against the said Order and the same was disposed of on 20.02.2023 leaving it open to the Municipality / Corporation to take action according to law. Pursuant to the said observation, the impugned Provisional Notice was issued to the Petitioner. 3. The apprehension of the Petitioner is that the Respondent Authorities would take further action pursuant to the Confirmation Order without giving any breathing time to the Petitioner to question the same. 4. Learned Standing Counsel for the Respondent No.2 would submit that due process and the time as specified under the Act would be adhered in the event of any action to be taken pursuant to the confirmation notice. 5. Taking note of the submission of the learned Standing Counsel, the Respondent authorities are directed to follow time schedule prescribed under the Act in the event of any action to be taken against the Petitioner pursuant to the confirmation order to be passed in the light of explanation offered by the petitioner to 4 the impugned Provisional Notice dated 12.03.2025. 6. With the above observation, the Writ Petition is disposed of. No order as to costs. As a sequel, miscellaneous applications pending, if any, shall stand closed. __________________ NYAPATHY VIJAY, J Date: 09.04.2025 eha 5 THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE NYAPATHY VIJAY WRIT PETITION No. 9313 of 2025 Date: 09.04.2025 eha U