IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH :: AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) THURSDAY, THE SECOND DAY OF JANUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE RAVI CHEEMALAPATI WRIT PETITION NO: 10970 OF 2021 Between: Tangadu Hari Krishna, S/o Late kameswara Rao, Aged About 34 years, Occ Bussiness, R/o. 11-3-132/A, Opp Road, Gopal Auto Mobiles, Chinna Baratam Street, Srikakulam. ...PETITIONER AND 1. The State of Andhra Pradesh, rep., by its Principal Secretary, Revenue Department, Secretariate Buildings, Velagapudi, Amaravathii Guntur District. 2. The District Collector, Srikakulam District. 3. The Revenue Divisional officer, Srikakulam Division, Srikakulam District. 4. The Thasildar, Srikakulam Mandal, Srikakulam District. 5. The Village Revenue officer, Srikakulam Mandal, Peddapadu Village.. 6. The State of Andhra Pradesh, Rep by its Principal Secretary Water Resources Department (Irrigation Department) Secretariat Buildings Velagapudi Amaravati, Guntur District. 7. The Executive Engineer, Irrigation, landCAD, Srikakulam 8. Bagu Dasaradha Rao, S/o.Dalayya, Aged about 54 Years, R/o.D.No.1- 135,Botta Street, Peddapadu, Srikakulam Mandal and Dist 9. N.Devanad Kumar Yadav, S/o.Simmanna,Aged about 42 Years, R/o. Ramalayam Street, Peddapadu, Srikakulam Mandal and Dist 10. Botta Chiranjeevi, S/o.Mandalaiah, Aged about 45 Years, R/o.GT Road Peddapadu, Srikakulam Mandal and Dist, , 11. Panila Jagannadham, S/o.Late Appala Suri.Aged about 36 Years, Main Road, Peddapadu, Srikakulam Mandal and Dist 12. Botta Murali, S/o.Mandalaiah, Aged about 42 Years, R/o.GT Road, Peddapadu, Srikakulam Mandal and Dist. ( RR 8 to 12 are impleaded as per the CO dt.01.10.2024 vide orders passed in lA No.01 of 2024.) ...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 to declare the action of the respondents in taking further steps demolish compound wall in my land in Sy.No.261/1 old survey no 775/1 to an extent of 488.88 Sq.yards and Sy.No.261/1 old survey no 775/1 to an extent of 256.52 Sq.yards in total admeasuring Ac. 0.15 cents of land situated in peddapadu village and panchayat of srikakulam Mandal and district, Andhra Pradesh without following due process as illegal, unjust and in violation of Principles of natural justice and consequentially direct the respondents and further direct them to construct the compound which has been demolished by them in illegal manner. lA NO: 1 OF 2021 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 stay demolition of Petitioner's property i.e. Compound wall and further direct the respondents not to interfere in any manner with the possession of petitioner pending disposal of the above writ petition. lA NO: 1 OF 2023 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 extend the interim order granted initially on 10.06.2021 which had further extended on 18.06.2021 and 12.07.2021 passed in I.A.No.1 of 2021 in the above writ petition pending disposal of the main writ petition. lA NO: 2 OF 2023 Between: 1. The State of Andhra Pradesh, rep., by its Principal Secretary, Revenue Department, Secretariate Buildings, Velagapudi, Amaravathii Guntur District. 2. The District Collector, Srikakulam District. 3. The Revenue Divisional officer, Srikakulam Division, Srikakulam District. 4. The Thasildar, Srikakulam Mandal, Srikakulam District. 5. The Village Revenue officer, Srikakulam Mandal, Peddapadu Village.. Petitioners/Respondents AND 1. Tangadu Hari Krishna, S/o Late kameswara Rao, Aged About 34 years, Occ Bussiness, R/o. 11-3-132/A, Opp Road, Gopal Auto Mobiles, Chinna Baratam Street, Srikakulam. Respondent/Petitioner 2. The State of Andhra Pradesh, Rep by its Principal Secretary Water Resources Department (Irrigation Department) Secretariat Buildings Velagapudi Amaravati, Guntur District. 3. The Executive Engineer, Irrigation, I and CAD, Srikakulam. Respondent/Respondent (Respondent Nos.2 and 3 are not necessary party in this Petition) 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 interim order dated 10.06.2021 in W.P.No. 10970 of 2021 and also dismiss the writ petition. lA NO: 2 OF 2024 Between: 1. Bagu Dasaradha Rao, S/o.Dalayya, Aged about 54 Years, R/o.D.No.1- 135,Botta Street, Peddapadu, Srikakulam Mandal and Dist N.Devanad Kumar Yadav, S/o.Simmanna,Aged about 42 Years, R/o. Ramalayam Street, Peddapadu, Srikakulam Mandal and Dist Botta Chiranjeevi, S/o.Mandalaiah, Aged about 45 Years, R/o.GT Road, Peddapadu, Srikakulam Mandal and Dist, Panila Jagannadham, S/o.Late Appala Suri,Aged about 36 Years, Main Road, Peddapadu, Srikakulam Mandal and Dist Botta Murali, S/o.Mandalaiah, Aged about 42 Years, R/o.GT Road, Peddapadu, Srikakulam Mandal and Dist. 2. 3. 4. 5. Petitioners/Proposed Respondents 8 to 12 AND 1. Tangadu Hari Krishna, S/o Late kameswara Rao, Aged About 34 years. Occ Bussiness, R/o. 11-3-132/A, Opp Road, Gopal Auto Mobiles, Chinna Baratam Street, Srikakulam. 2. The State of Andhra Pradesh, rep., by its Principal Secretary, Revenue Department, Secretariate Buildings, Velagapudi, Amaravathii Guntur District. 3. The District Collector, Srikakulam District. 4. The Revenue Divisional officer, Srikakulam Division, Srikakulam District. 5. The Thasildar, Srikakulam Mandal, Srikakulam District. 6. The Village Revenue officer, Srikakulam Mandal, Peddapadu Village.. 7. The State of Andhra Pradesh, Rep by its Principal Secretary Water Resources Department (Irrigation Department) Secretariat Buildings Velagapudi Amaravati, Guntur District. 8. The Executive Engineer, Irrigation, I and CAD, Srikakulam Respondents/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 interim order dated; 10.06.2021 in W.P.No; 10970 of 2021. Counsel for the PetitionerrSRI M SRIKANTH Counsel for the Respondents No.1 to 5: GP FOR REVENUE Counsel for the Respondents No.6,7: GP FOR IRRIGATION Counsel for the Respondents No.8 to 12: SRI P V A PADMANBHAM The Court made the following: ORDER w 1 APHC010192842021 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) 0E0 [3332] THURSDAY ,THE SECOND DAY OF JANUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE RAVI CHEEMALAPATI WRIT PETITION NO: 10970/2021 Between: Tangadu Hari Krishna ...PETITIONER AND The State Of Andhra Pradesh and Others ...RESPONDENT(S) Counsel for the Petitioner; 1.M SRIKANTH Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1.P VAPADMANABHAM 2.GP FOR REVENUE 3.GP FOR IRRIGATION COMM AREA DEV The Court made the following Order: The grievance of the petitioner is that the respondent authorities are highhandedly taking further steps to demolish compound wall land in Sy.No.261/1 old survey No.775/1 to an extent of Ac.488.88 Sq.yards and Sy.No.261/1 old survey No.775/1 to an extent of Ac.256.52 Sq.yards in total ad-measuring Ac.0.15 cents of land situated in Peddapadu village and ▼ 2 Panchayat of Srikakulam Mandal without following procedure contemplated under law. 02. Heard Sri M.Srikanth, learned counsel for the petitioner, Sri J.Krishna Praneeth, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue. Sri PVA Padmanabham, learned counsel for the unofficial respondent. Learned counsel for the petitioner in elaboration to what has been stated in the affidavit submitted that without invoking the procedure envisaged under the provisions of Andhra Pradesh Land Encroachment Act, 1905, the authorities highhandedly demolished a part of East side compound wall. In view of the same, prayed to award damages for the said illegal action. 03. He further contended that, if the authorities proceed further with the demolition of compound wall, the petitioner will be put to suffer irreparable loss and damage. He further submitted that, the revenue authorities are not allowing the petitioner to construct a compound wall in his own land. As such, prayed to pass appropriate orders protecting the interest of the petitioner. On the other hand, Sri PVA Padmanabham, learned counsel for the unofficial respondents vehemently opposed for disposal of the writ petition and contended that the writ petition has to be dismissed with exemplary costs as the petitioner has not approached the Court with clean hands. Infact the petitioner has approached the competent Civil Court by filing a civil suit vide O.S.No.490 of 2023 on the file of Principal Junior Civil Judge’s Court, Srikakulam and now by suppressing all these facts, filed the present writ petition. This Court should not show any indulgence on him and accordingly prayed to dismiss the writ petition with exemplary costs. 04. On the other hand, Sri Praneeth, learned Assistant Government Pleader while justifying the action of the official respondents contended that the 05. m w 3 authorities by following the procedure contemplated under the law have demolished the compound wall. Infact, a survey was also conducted wherein the official respondents noticed that the petitioner has encroached to an extent of Ac.0.02 cents. In these circumstances, no indulgence need be shown to redress the grievance of petitioner, accordingly prayed to dismiss the writ petition. 06. In reply, the learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the said suit was not filed before filing the writ petition as alleged but it was filed only / after filing the present writ petition. y \ 07. Perused the material available on record and considered the submissions of both the learned counsel. It can be noticed that, the respondent authorities highhandedly demolished a part of the petitioners compound wall without following the procedure contemplated under the law and hence, the petitioner prayed to award damages for the said action. Whereas, learned counsel for unofficial respondents contended that, the petitioner has filed the present writ petition by suppressing the fact that the petitioner had already knocked the doors of the Civil Court, vide O.S.No.490 of 2023 on the file of Principal Junior Civil Judge’s Court, Srikakulam. However, as the respondent authorities have already demolished a part of compound wall, if at all the petitioner has any grievance and wants to claim any damages, he has to approach the appropriate forum. As there are several disputed facts involved in the present case, this Court cannot take up the task of resolving disputed questions of facts under Article 226 of Constitution of India. 08. Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of. It is needless to observe that, if at all the petitioner has any intention to construct compound wall In his property, he is not precluded however after i 4 > obtaining necessary permissions from the concerned authorities. There shall be no order as to costs. As a sequel thereto, pending miscellaneous petitions if any, shall stands closed. Sd/- P.U.V.BHASKAR RAO ASSISTANT REGISTRAR 'I?- SECTION OFFICER //TRUE COPY// To, The Principal Secretary, State of Andhra Pradesh, Revenue Department, Secretariate Buildings, Velagapudi, Amaravathii Guntur District. The District Collector, Srikakulam District. The Revenue Divisional officer, Srikakulam Division, Srikakulam District. The Thasildar, Srikakulam Mandal, Srikakulam District. The Village Revenue officer, Srikakulam Mandal, Peddapadu Village.. The Principal Secretary, State of Andhra Pradesh, Water Resources Department (Irrigation Department) Secretariat Buildings Velagapudi Amaravati, Guntur District. The Extcutive Engineer, Irrigation, I and CAD, Srikakulam 48. One CG to SRI M. SRIKANTH Advocate [OPUC] ^4. Two CCs to GP FOR REVENUE, High Court of Andhra Pradesh. [OUT] 10. Two CCs to GP FOR IRRIGATION, High Court of Andhra Pradesh. [OUT] Ut. One CC to SRI P.V.A. PADMANABHAM, Advocate [OPUC] 12. Three C.D. Copies 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. nm HIGH COURT DATED:02/01/2025 ORDER WP.No.10970 of 2021 DISPOSING OF THE WP WITHOUT COSTS