APHC010234892024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) FRIDAY, THE FOURTH DAY OF JULY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE NYAPATHY VIJAY WRIT PETITION NO: 11775 OF 2024 Between: 1. B Chennamma, W/o. Ramudu, aged about 47 years, R/o. H.No. 57-28- C, Khnderi Street, Kurnool City and District. 2. M. Krishna, S/o. M.Devadasu, aged about 52 years, R/o. H.No. 57-27- 27-A, Khanderi Street, Kurnool City and District. 3. G.Bhaskar, S/o. Yacob, aged about 62 years, R/o. H.No. 57-27-30-A1, Khanderi Street, Kurnool City and District. 4. M. Aseervadamma, M.Ranga Swamy, aged about 48 years, R/o.H.No. 57-27-A, Khanderi Street, Kurnool City and District. 5. E.Seekamrna, W/o. Srinu, aged about 46 years, R/o.H.No.52-87, Khanderi Street, Kurnool City and District. 6. G.Anjanamma, W/o. Venkateswarlu, aged about 36 years, R/o. H.No. 57-27-44, Khanderi Street, Kurnool City and District. 7. Uppari Mounika, D/o. Venkateswarlu, aged about 25 years, R/o.H.No. 57-27-C2, Khanderi Street, Kurnool. 8. M.Jayamrna, W/o. Devadasu, aged about 65 years, (God Servant) Ceon Ministries Society Prardhana Mandiram, R/o. H.No.57-27-23-A , Old Municipal Office Road, Revenue Ward No. 57, Kurnool City and District ...Petitioners AND I 1. The State of Andhra Pradesh, Rep by its Principal Secretary, Municipal Administration Department, Secretariat Buildings, Secretariat, Velagapudi, Guntur District, Andhra Pradesh. 2. The Municipal Corporation of Kurnool, Rep. by its Commissioner, Kurnool Town, Kurnool District. 3. The Town Planning Officer, Kurnool Municipal Corporation, Kurnool City and Kurnool District. 4. The Tahsildar, Kurnool Urban Mandal, Kurnool District. 5. Erapogu Suresh, S/o Erapogu Prasad, Aged about 37 years, R/o. D.No. 57/27/29. Khanderi Street, Kurnool City, Kurnool District. 6. R Mallikharjuna Babu, S/o. R.Radhanna, Aged about 44 years, R/o. D.No 57/27/15, Khanderi Street, Kurnool City, Kurnool District. 7. S Rarna Krishna, S/o. S. Rama Dasu, Aged about 43 years, R/o. D.N0.57/27/36A, Khanderi Street, Kurnool City, Kurnool District. 8. E Maddamma, W/o. E. Prasad, Aged about 49 years, R/o, D.No.57/27/29, Khanderi Street, Kurnool City, Kurnool District, 9. Mallepogu Babuji, S/o. Chinna Masumanna, Aged about 34 years, R/o.D.No.07/27/33, Khanderi Street, Kurnool City, Kurnool District. 10. A Gopi, S/o.Lakshmanna, Aged about 42 years, R/o. D.No.57/27/47, Khanderi Street, Kurnool City, Kurnool District. 11. Addakula Satish, S/o. David, aged about 29 years, R/o.D.No.57/27/31, Khanderi Street, Kurnool City, Kurnool District. ...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 Writ, Order or Direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the 2nd and 3rd respondents in demolishing the houses of the petitioners respective houses bearing Nos, 57- 23-C, 57/27/27A, 57/27/30-A1, 57/27/A, 57/87/A, 57/27/44, 57,271C2 and 57/27-41 situated in Khanderi Street adjacent to municipal qua tors Kurnool Town and District without issuing notice/ opportunity or Enquiry as per the direction of the Hon'ble Court passed in WP No. 10349 of 2023 dated 26.04.2023 is as illegal, arbitrary in violation of principles of natural justice apart from violation of article 19, 21 and 300-A of Constitution of India and consequently direct the official respondents not to interfere in re-constructing the demolished houses by the petitioners, without completion of thorough enquiry lA NO: 1 OF 2024 Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to direct the official respondents not to interfere in re-constructing the demolished houses by the petitioners respective houses bearing Nos. 57-28- C, 57/27/27A, 57/27/30-A1, 57/27/A, 57/87/A, 57/27/44, 57/27/C2 and 57/27- 41 situated in Khanderi Street adjacent to municipal quarters Kurnool Town and District, without completion of thorough enquiry, pending disposal of the Writ Petition lA NO: 3 OF 2024 Between: Erapogu Suresh, S/o Erapogu Prasad, Aged about 37 years, R/o. D.No. 57/27/29. Khanderi Street, Kurnool City, Kurnool District. R Mallikharjuna Babu, S/o. R.Radhanna, Aged about 44 years, R/o. D.No 57/27/15, Khanderi Street, Kurnool City, Kurnool District. S Rarna Krishna, S/o. S. Rama Dasu, Aged about 43 years, R/o. D.N0.57/27/36A, Khanderi Street, Kurnool City, Kurnool District. E Maddamma, W/o. E. Prasad, Aged about 49 years, R/o, D.No.57/27/29, Khanderi Street, Kurnool City, Kurnool District, Addakula Satish, S/o. David, aged about 29 years, R/o.D.No.57/27/31, Khanderi Street, Kurnool City, Kurnool District. 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. ...Petitioners/Respondents No.5 to 8 & 11 AND B Chennamma, W/o. Ramudu, aged about 47 years, R/o. H.No. 57-28- C, Khnderi Street, Kurnool City and District. M. Krishna, S/o. M.Devadasu, aged about 52 years, R/o. H.No. 57-27- 27-A, Khanderi Street, Kurnool City and District. G.Bhaskar, S/o. Yacob, aged about 62 years, R/o. H.No. 57-27-30-A1, Khanderi Street, Kurnool City and District. M. Aseervadamma, M.Ranga Swamy, aged about 48 years, R/o.H.No. 57-27-A, Khanderi Street, Kurnool City and District. E.Seekamrna, W/o. Srinu, aged about 46 years, R/o.H.No.52-87, Khanderi Street, Kurnool City and District. G.Anjanamma, W/o. Venkateswarlu, aged about 36 years, R/o. H.No. 57-27-44, Khanderi Street, Kurnool City and District. Uppari Mounika, D/o. Venkateswarlu, aged about 25 years, R/o.H.No. 57-27-C2, Khanderi Street, Kurnool. M.Jayamrna, W/o. Devadasu, aged about 65 years, (God Servant) Ceon Ministries Society Prardhana Mandiram, R/o. H.No.57-27-23-A , Old Municipal Office Road, Revenue Ward No. 57, Kurnool City and District 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. ...Respondents/Writ Petitioners 9. The State of Andhra Pradesh, Rep by its Principal Secretary, Municipal Administration Department, Secretariat Buildings, Secretariat, Velagapudi, Guntur District, Andhra Pradesh. 10. The Municipal Corporation of Kurnool, Rep. by its Commissioner, Kurnool Town, Kurnool District. 11. The Town Planning Officer, Kurnool Municipal Corporation, Kurnool City and Kurnool District. 12. The Tahsildar, Kurnool Urban Mandal, Kurnool District. 13. Mallepogu Babuji, S/o. Chinna Masumanna, Aged about 34 years, R/o.D.No.07/27/33, Khanderi Street, Kurnool City, Kurnool District. 14. A Gopi, S/o.Lakshmanna, Aged about 42 years, R/o. D.No.57/27/47, Khanderi Street, Kurnool City, Kurnool District. .. .Respondents/Respondents Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to vacate the interim order dated 10.05.2024 in I.A.No.1/2024 in W.P.No.11775 of 2024 by dismissing the Writ Petition lA NO: 1 OF 2025 Between: Kurnool Municipal Corporation, Kurnool, Rep. by its Commissioner, The Kurnool Town, Kurnool District. ...Petitioner/Respondent No.2 AND W/o. Ramudu, aged about 47 years, R/o. H.No. 57-28- C, Khnderi Street, Kurnool City and District. S/o. M.Devadasu, aged about 52 years, R/o. H.No. 57-27- 1. B Chennamma, 2. M. Krishna, 27-A, Khanderi Street, Kurnool City and District. 3. G.Bhaskar, S/o. Yacob, aged about 62 years, R/o. H.No. 57-27-30-A1, Khanderi Street, Kurnool City and District. 4. M. Aseervadamma, M.Ranga Swamy, aged about 48 years, R/o.H.No. 57-27-A, Khanderi Street, Kurnool City and District. 5. E.Seekamrna, W/o. Srinu, aged about 46 years, R/o.H.No.52-87, Khanderi Street, Kurnool City and District. W/o. Venkateswarlu, aged about 36 years, R/o. H.No. 6. G.Anjanamma 57.27-44, Khanderi Street, Kurnool City and District. 7. Uppari Mounika, D/o. Venkateswarlu, aged about 25 years, R/o.H.No. 57-27-C2, Khanderi Street, Kurnool. M.Jayamrna, W/o. Devadasu, Ceon Old Municipal Office Road, Revenue Ward No. 57, Kurnool City and aged about 65 years, (God Servant) Ministries Society Prardhana Mandiram, R/o. H.No.57-27-23-A, 8. District i ...Respondents/Wrlt Petitioners 9. The State of Andhra Pradesh, Rep by its Principal Secretary, Municipal Administration Department, Secretariat Buildings, Secretariat, Velagapudi, Guntur District, Andhra Pradesh. 10. The Town Planning Officer, Kurnool Municipal Corporation, Kurnool City and Kurnool District. 11. The Tahsildar, Kurnool Urban Mandal, Kurnool District. 12. Erapogu Suresh, S/o Erapogu Prasad, Aged about 37 years, R/o. D.No. 57/27/29. Khanderi Street, Kurnool City, Kurnool District. 13. R Mallikharjuna Babu, S/o. R.Radhanna, Aged about 44 years, R/o. D.No 57/27/15, Khanderi Street, Kurnool City, Kurnool District. 14. S Rarna Krishna, S/o. S. Rama Dasu, Aged about 43 years, R/o. D.N0.57/27/36A, Khanderi Street, Kurnool City, Kurnool District. 15. E Maddamma, W/o. E. Prasad, Aged about 49 years, R/o, D.No.57/27/29, Khanderi Street, Kurnool City, Kurnool District, 16. Mallepogu Babuji, S/o. Chinna Masumanna, Aged about 34 years, R/o.D.No.07/27/33, Khanderi Street, Kurnool City, Kurnool District. 17. A Gopi, S/o.Lakshmanna, Aged about 42 years, R/o. D.No.57/27/47, Khanderi Street, Kurnool City, Kurnool District. 18. Addakula Satish, S/o. David, aged about 29 years, R/o.D.No.57/27/31, Khanderi Street, Kurnool City, Kurnool District. .. .Respondents/Respondents Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to vacate the interim orders dated 10-05-2024 and 23-09-2024 passed in I.A.No.1 of 2024 in W.P.No. 11775 of 2024 Counsel for the Petitioners: SRI J U M V PRASAD Counsel for the Respondents No.1, 3: GP FOR MUNCIPAL ADMN URBAN DEV Counsel for the Respondent No.2: SRI POTHAM VENGALA REDDY SC For M.Corporation in Rayalaseema region In Counsel for the Respondent No.4; GP FOR REVENUE Counsel for the Respondents No.5 to 8,11: SRI C SUBODH The Court made the following order: j K 1 APHC010234892024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3460] FRIDAY,THE FOURTH DAY OF JULY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE NYAPATHY VIJAY WRIT PETITION NO: 11775/2024 Between: 1.B CHENNAMMA, W/0. RAMUDU, AGED ABOUT 47 YEARS, R/0. H.NO. 57-28-C, KHNDERl STREET, KURNOOL CITY AND DISTRICT. 2.M. KRISHNA, S/0. M.DEVADASU, AGED ABOUT 52 YEARS, R/0. H.NO. 57-27-27-A, KHANDERI STREET, KURNOOL CITY AND DISTRICT. 3.G.BHASKAR,, S/0. YACOB, AGED ABOUT 62 YEARS, R/0. H.NO. 57- 27-30-A1, KHANDERI STREET, KURNOOL CITY AND DISTRICT. 4.M. ASEERVADAMMA., M.RANGA SWAMY, AGED ABOUT 48 YEARS, R/0.H.NO. 57-27-A, KHANDERI STREET, KURNOOL CITY AND DISTRICT. 5.E.SEEKAMRNA,, W/0. SRINU, AGED ABOUT 46 YEARS, R/0.H.N0.52- 87, KHANDERI STREET, KURNOOL CITY AND DISTRICT. 6.G.ANJANAMMA, , W/0. VENKATESWARLU, AGED ABOUT 36 YEARS, R/0. H.NO. 57-27-44, KHANDERI STREET, KURNOOL CITY AND DISTRICT. 7.UPPARI MOUNIKA,, D/0. VENKATESWARLU, AGED ABOUT 25 YEARS, R/0.H.NO. 57-27-C2, KHANDERI STREET, KURNOOL. 8.M.JAYAMRNA,, W/0. DEVADASU, AGED ABOUT 65 YEARS, (GOD SERVANT) CEON MINISTRIES SOCIETY PRARDHANA MANDIRAM, R/0. H.N0.57-27-23-A, OLD MUNICIPAL OFFICE ROAD, REVENUE WARD NO. 57, KURNOOL CITY AND DISTRICT ...PETITIONER(S) 2 AND 1. THE STATE OF AP, REP BY ITS MUNICIPAL ADMINISTRATION PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, SECRETARIAT GUNTUR DISTRICT, BUILDINGS, SECRETARIAT, VELAGAPLJof ANDHRA PRADESH. 2. THE MUNICIPAL CORPORATION OF KURNOOL REP RY itq COMMISSIONER, KURNOOL TOWN, KURNOOL DISTRICT. 3. THE TOWN PLANNING CORPORATION, KURNOOL CItT AND'^^URNOOrD^^RIc""'"'"^^ 4. THE TAHSILDAR, KURNOOL URBAN MANDAL, KURNOOL 5. ERAPOGU SURESH, , S/0 ERAPOGU PRASAD AGED AROl IT YEARS, R/0. D.NO. 57/27/29. KHANDERI STREET KURNOOL DISTRICT. ^ YEARS^'R/n^'^n ’^ ^^ADHANNA, AGED ABOUT 44 Sol DISTRICT®"^”^^' CITY, DISTRICT. 37 KURNOOL CITY KRISHNA, S/0. S,RAMA DASU, AGED ABOUT 43 YEARS K^RNo'^^roiSf' KURNOoIS 8. E MADDAMMA, W/O.E.PRASAD, D.NO.57/27/29, KHANDERI STREET DISTRICT, AGED ABOUT 49 YEARS, R/0 . KURNOOL CITY, KURNOOL 9. MALLEPOGU BABUJI, , S/O.CHINNA MASUMANNA YEARS, R/O.D.NO.07/27/33, KHANDERI KURNOOL DISTRICT. 10.A GOPI, S/O.LAKSHMANNA, AGED ABOUT 42 YEARS DISTRICT^^"^^’ street, KURNOOL CITY, KURNOOL AGED ABOUT 34 STREET, KURNOOL CITY, R/0. 11.ADDAKULA SATISH, S/O.DAVID, AGED ABOUT 29 YFARCi DISTRICT STREET, KURNOOL CITY, KURNOOL ...RESPONDENT(S): Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit fiied therewith, the High cLrt may be 3 pleased topleased to issue Writ, Order or Direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the 2nd and 3rd respondents in demolishing the houses of the petitioners respective houses bearing Nos, 57- 23-C, 57/27/27A, 57/27/30-A1, 57/27/A, 57/87/A, 57/27/44, 57,27102 and 57/27- 41 situated in Khanderi Street adjacent to municipal qua tors Kurnool Town and District without issuing notice/ opportunity or Enquiry as per the direction of the Hon'ble Court passed in WP No.10349 of 2023 dated 26.04.2023 is as illegal, arbitrary in violation of principles of natural justice apart from violation of article 19, 21 and 300-A of Constitution of India and consequently direct the official respondents not to interfere in re-constructing the demolished houses by the petitioners, without completion of thorough enquiry and pass lA NO: 1 OF 2024 Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to direct the official respondents not to interfere in re-constructing the demolished houses by the petitioners respective houses bearing Nos. 57-28-C, 57/27/27A, 57/27/30-A1, 57/27/A, 57/87/A, 57/27/44, 57/27/C2 and 57/27-41 situated in Khanderi Street adjacent to municipal quarters Kurnool Town and District, without completion of thorough enquiry, pending disposal of the Writ Petition and to pass lA NO: 2 OF 2024 Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased may be pleased to dispense with filing of Certified copy of Orders passed in I.A.No. 1/2024 in W.P.No.11775/2024, dt.10.05.2024 and pass lA NO: 3 OF 2024 Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased may be pleased to vacate the interim order dated 10.05.2024 in I.A.No.1/2024 in W.P.No.11775 of 2024 by dismissing the Writ Petition and pass lA NO: 1 OF 2025 Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased may be pleased to vacate the interim orders dated 10-05-2024 and 23-09-2024 passed in I.A.No.1 of 2024 in W.P.No. 11775 of 2024 and pass 4 Counsel for the Petitioner(S): 1.J U M VPRASAD Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1.SC For M.Corporation in Rayalaseema region In 2.GP FOR MUNCIPAL ADMN URBAN DEV 3.GP FOR REVENUE 4.0 SUBODH The Court made the following: 5 THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE NYAPATHY VIJAY W.P. No.11775 of 2024 ORDER: nd The present Writ Petition was filed seeking to declare the action of the 2 and 3^^ Respondents in demolishing the houses of the Petitioners respective houses bearing Nos. 57-28-C, 57/27/27A, 57/27/30-A1, 57/27/A, 57/87/A, 1. 57/27/44, 57,27/C2 and 57/27-41 situated in Khanderi Street adjacent to municipal quarters Kurnool Town and District without issuing notice/ opportunity or Enquiry as per the direction of the Hon'ble Court passed in WP No.10349 of 2023 dated 26.04.2023 is as illegal and arbitrary. 2. The facts leading to filing of the present Writ Petition are as follows; The Petitioners were allotted house site pattas by the RespondentNo.4 in the year 2008 and consequent thereto, they have constructed their respective houses in the above mentioned property. It is also stated that Respondent No.8 had acquired the property bearing No.52/27-41 under registered Agreement of Sale executed by the Municipal Corporation of Kurnool vide Registered Document No. 13945/2018, dated 27.12.2018 and constructed Ceon Ministries Society Prardhana Mandiram ( a Church) and a Possession Certificate was also issued by the Respondent No.4. While so, a Notice dated 07.05.2021 was issued by the Respondent No.2 calling upon the Petitioners to vacate the premises within a period of three days. 6 3. Questioning the same, the Petitioners filed W.P.No.10716 of 2021 the same was disposed of on 05.11.2021 with a direction to the Respondent No.2 to consider the explanation of the Petitioners and orders. and pass appropriate 4. It is further stated that subsequently another Notice dated 25.2.2022 was issued by the Respondent No.2 vide Rc.No.9653/2012/G3 calling the Petitioners to remove the constructions within upon a period of 3 days. Questioning the said Notice, the Petitioners filed W.P.No.7914 of 2022 before this Court raising various grounds. However, on 22.02.2023, the W.P.No.7914 of 2022 was dismissed for Non Prosecution and was filed. no restoration application 5. Consequent on the dismissal of W.P.No.7914 of 2022 the unofficial Respondents had given Representations dated 28.02.2023 calling upon the Respondent Authorities to take action for demolition houses of the Petitioners. As Authorities, and 04.04.2023 of the no action was taken by the Respondent the unofficial Respondents filed W.P.No.10349 of 2023 questioning the inaction of the Respondent No.2. was disposed of with a direction to the Respondent representations dated 28.02.2023 and 04.04.2023 submitted by the Petitioners/Respondent Nos. 5 to 11. On 26.04.2023, the W.P.No.10349 of 2023 No.2 to pass appropriate orders on the 7 6. Pursuant to the Orders of this Court, the Respondent Nos. 2 and 3 demolished the houses of the Petitioners. Hence, the present Writ Petition is filed by the Petitioners. On 13.04.2024, it is informed to the Court that the demolition was on account of the Contempt Case No.4432 of 2023 filed by the unofficial Respondents for compliance of the Orders in W.P.No.10349 of 2023. 7. Learned counsel for the Petitioner would submit that pursuant to the interim orders of this Court in I.A.No.01 of 2024, the houses have been reconstructed by the Petitioners. It was stated that Petitioners had obtained House Site Pattas and Possession Certificates from the then Tahsildar, Kurnool Urban. Learned counsel for the Petitioners further submits that the Petitioners have been residing in the subject premises for substantial number of years and as the Possession Certificates of the Petitioners are not in dispute and considering their social strata, they should be permitted to continue in the said premises or provide alternative house sites to them. Learned counsel for the Petitioners would further submit that the pattas in favour of the Petitioners are genuine 8. The Respondent No.2 filed Counter Affidavit stating that the erstwhile Kurnool Municipality had constructed 50 residential quarters in an extent of Ac.1.15 cents situated in Sy.No.35/Cl A1 of Kurnool Town for the residence of 8 their Sanitary Workers . In the said land, an extent of Ac.0.06 cents was left for reserved open space for developing a park for public purpose. It is stated that a park was developed in the reserved open space of Ac.0.06 cents. It is also stated that the Petitioners had encroached the land reserved open space and illegally erected huts and constructed buildings and are residing in the said premises without the knowledge of the Respondent No.2. When this fact was brought to the notice of the Respondent Corporation, a Notice dated 07.05.2021 was issued to the Petitioners to remove the constructions made in the place reserved for park within a period of three days as mentioned in the affidavit filed in support of the Writ Petition. 9. In the Counter Affidavit, the Respondent No.2 further stated that the action was initiated in obedience to the orders passed by this Court in W.P.No.10349 of 2023, dated 26.04.2023. It is also stated that the predecessor-in-office of the Deponent on behalf of Respondent No.2 had conducted a hearing on 30.10.2023 and the Petitioners attended in the said hearing, but they did not furnish any documents in support of their version. It is further stated that in the said hearing, the Petitioners stated that they belong to the weaker section category and permit them to live in the said huts situated in the open site. Thereafter, a Letter dated 18.11.2023 addressed by the Respondent No.2 to the District Collector to consider alternative house sites to the Petitioners on humanitarian grounds. was 9 10. Learned Standing Counsel appearing for the Respondent No.2 would contend that pursuant to the orders of this Court in W.P.No.10716 of 2021 notices were issued to the Petitioners to conduct enquiry. It is further contended that pursuant to the enquiry, Orders dated 25.02.2022 were passed. He would further contend that in the said enquiry, the Petitioners had produced Xerox copies of Possession Certificates/Aadhar Cards, Property Tax Receipts and Electricity Bills and the said documents were sent to the Tahsildar, Kurnool Urban, vide Lr.Roc.No.G2/4546/2019, dated 18.01.2022, for clarification on genuinity of Pattas/Possession Certificates. Thereupon, the said Tahsildar had issued a Letter on 19.02.2022 stating that he has verified the documents and opined that the said house site pattas were not traced out and therefore, the same are said to be not genuine one 11. Learned counsel for the Respondent Nos. 5 to 8 and 11 would contend that W.P.No.10349 of 2023 was filed as no action was taken by the Respondent Authorities to remove the unauthorized constructions made by the Petitioners even after disposal of W.P.No.7914 of 2022. As no action has been taken by the Respondent Authorities, the unofficial respondents/Respondent Nos. 5 to 8 and 11 had constrained to file the Contempt Case after waiting for nearly six months. 10 Learned counsel for the unofficial Respondents further contends that the land in which the Petitioners occupied is an open space/ park left for the Municipal Corporation and the Petitioners cannot be permitted to continue the said open space by encroaching the park area. Learned counsel for the Respondent Nos. 5 to 8 and 11 further contends that they had filed a Memo on 10.09.2024 vide USR No.80387/2024, wherein an endorsement dated 19.07.2024 issued by the Tahsildar, Kurnool Urban vide L.Dis.No.332/2024 was issued stating that the pattas in favour of the Petitioners were not issued by the said office. 12. in 13. He would further contend that the Orders dated 25.02.2022 challenged in W.P.No.7914 of 2022, and as the said Writ Petition No.7914 of 2022 was dismissed for non prosecution, the Respondent Authorities had complied with the orders passed in W.P.No.10349 of 2023. were 14. Learned counsel for unofficial Respondents would reiterate the fact that the house site pattas in favour of the Petitioners were not genuine and their continuation in the premises reserved for open space/park cannot be sustained. After hearing the respective counsel, this Court is of the opinion that the house site pattas in favour of the Petitioners are under a cloud. The Revenue Authorities submits that the pattas in favour of the Petitioners are not traced 15. 11 out and the Petitioners were unable to establish the genuineness of the pattas in their favour. Secondly, the area occupied by the Petitioners is an open space reserved for park and no house site patta can be granted thereon even on merits. 16. Thirdly, the Writ Petition questioning the Order dated 25.02.2022 was dismissed for non prosecution and the action of the Respondent Authorities in demolishing the houses of the Petitioners cannot be faulted. The present Writ Petition to declare the action of the Respondent Authorities in demolishing the houses of the Petitioners without seeking to set aside the Orders dated 25.02.2022 in W.P.No.7914 of 2022 and W.P.No.10349 of 2024 cannot be maintained. 17. As the Orders dated 25.02.2022 passed by the Respondent Authorities had attained finality, this Court does not find any reason to interfere with the action of the Respondent Authorities. However, considering the social status of the Petitioners and the fact that they had constructed houses in the subject property on the belief that the house pattas were given to them, it would be appropriate for the Respondent Authorities to provide alternative house sites to the Petitioners in the ongoing welfare schemes of the Respondent State. This exercise shall be completed within a period of three months. In the event. 12 the Petitioners do not accept the alternative house sites, the Respondent Authorities shall forthwith evict the Petitioners. Accordingly, the Writ Petition is disposed of. There shall be no order as 18. to costs. As a sequel, the miscellaneous Petitions, if any, shall stand closed. Sd/- P VINOD KUMAR ASSISTANT REGISTRAR SECTIO^FFICER //TRUE COPY// To, 1. The Principal Secretary, State of Andhra Pradesh, Municipal Administration Department, Secretariat Buildings, Secretariat, Velagapudi, Guntur District, Andhra Pradesh. 2. The Commissioner, Municipal Corporation of Kurnool, Kurnool Town, Kurnool District. 3. The Town Planning Officer, Kurnool Municipal Corporation, Kurnool City and Kurnool District. 4. The Tahsildar, Kurnool Urban Mandal, Kurnool District. 5. One CC to SRIJ U M V PRASAD Advocate [OPUC] 6. One CC to SRI POTHAM VENGALA REDDY SC For M.Corporation in Rayalaseema region In Advocate [OPUC] 7. Two CCs to GP FOR MUNCIPAL ADMN URBAN DEV High Court of Andhra Pradesh [OUT] 8. Two CCs to GP FOR REVENUE High Court of Andhra Pradesh [OUT] 9. One CC to SRI C SUBODH Advocate [OPUC] 10. Two CD Copies GSG «* HIGH COURT DATED: 04/07/2025 ORDER WP NO. 11775 OF 2024 Current Sectron ^ , ' - - DISPOSING THE WP WITHOUT COSTS