APHC010200972013 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3333] WEDNESDAY ,THE TWENTY SECOND DAY OF JANUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE V.SUJATHA WRIT PETITION NO: 29837/2013 Between: Chundru Srihari Rao ...PETITIONER AND The Government Of Andhra Pradesh and Others ...RESPONDENT(S) Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. VUYYURU LAKSHMANA RAO Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. M Krishna Rao SC for skl vzm kkd Municipal Corporations 2. GP FOR MUNCIPAL ADMN AND URBAN DEV 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, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the 2nd respondents and its men in trying to take possession of the petitioners property and demolish structures without any authority of law as illegal null void and unconstitutionaland pass…” 2. The brief facts of the case are that the petitioner is the owner of the Plot in T.S.No.1591, Ward No.20 on Subash Road, Kakinada and the width of the said road is 60 feet. The petitioner had obtained permission from the respondent No.2 vide Proceedings No.512/84, dated 24.09.1984 for construction of a Multi Storied Building. The respondent No.2 while granting the permission has mentioned that as per the master plan the subject road is proposed to be increased to 80 feet and each side of the road would be widened by 10 feet each and thereafter, the petitioner has constructed the building as per the master plan. 3. While so, the respondent No.2-Corporation had visited the petitioner’s site and started marking another 5 feet in the petitioner’s side land for road widening. On an enquiry, the petitioner got to know that some of the persons have constructed buildings on the opposite side without leaving 10 feet for expansion of the road. Therefore, in order to benefit those persons the respondent-corporation is intending to mark another 5-6 feet more on the petitioner’s side of the road and the grievance of the petitioner is also that with regard to the said expansion of the road, the respondent Corporation has neither given any land acquisition notification nor any notice to the petitioner. Aggrieved by the action of the official respondents, the petitioner filed the present writ petition. 4. When the matter came up for admission on 11.10.2013, this Court was pleased to grant the following interim order in W.P.M.P.No.37043 of 2013: “Without following the due process of law, the immovable properties of the petitioners shall not be acquired by the Municipal Corporation of Kakinada.” 5. Heard Sri V.Lakshman Rao, learned counsel for the petitioner, learned Government Pleader for Municipal Administration and Urban Development appearing for the respondent No.1, Sri M.Krishna Rao, learned Standing Counsel appearing for the respondent No.2 and perused the material available on record. 6. Today when the matter came up for hearing, learned Standing Counsel appearing for the respondent No.2 on oral instructions has submitted that in pursuance of the interim order dated 11.10.2013 granted by this Court, the Municipal Corporation of Kakinada has not intended to acquire the immovable properties of the petitioner and if at all they intend to do so, they would follow the due process of law. 7. In view of the oral instructions submitted by the learned Standing Counsel, instead of keeping the writ petition pending, this Court feels it appropriate to dispose of the writ petition by directing the respondent No.2- Municipal Corporation, Kakinada, not to acquire the immovable properties and as well as not to interfere with the peaceful possession of the petitioner herein without following due process of law. 8. With the above direction, the Writ Petition is disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs. Miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, in this Writ Petition shall stand closed. ___________________ JUSTICE V.SUJATHA Date: 22.01.2025 SRT 337 THE HONOURABLE SMT.JUSTICE V.SUJATHA W.P.No.29837 of 2013 Date: 22.01.2025 SRT