IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) FRIDAY, THE NINTH DAY OF MAY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE NYAPATHY VIJAY WRIT PETITION NO: 12762 OF 2025 Between: Talari Pedda Sreenivasulu, S/o. Talari Pullanna Aged about 58 Years, R/o. H No.15/1834, (Old H. No. 15-348-B), (Tadipatri Municipal Assessment No. 363), CB Road, Revenue Ward No 15, Tadipatri, Ananthapuram District, A.P- 515411 ...PETITIONER AND 1. The State of Andhra Pradesh, Rep. by its Principal Secretary, Municipal Administration and Urban Development Department, Secretariat, Velagapudi, Guntur District. 2. Tadipatri Municipality, Represented by its Commissioner Tadipatri, Ananthapuram District ...RESPONDENTS Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying that in the circumstancesstated in the affidavitfiled therewith,the High Court may be pleased to pass an order or orders or direction more particularly one in the nature of a writ of Mandamus declaring that the action of the 2nd respondent in issuing impugned Encroachment Notice vide No.04/TPS/S- 23/2025 dt.25.04.2025 directing the Petitioner herein to remove the Residential House No.15/1834 (Old H.No. 15-348-B, Tadipatri Municipal Assessment No. 363), CB Road, Revenue Ward No 15, Tadipatri, Ananthapuram District, A.P, without issuing any show- cause notice to the Petitioner herein as wholly illegal, arbitrary, motivated, unfair, contrary to principles of Natural Justice provisions of the Andhra Pradesh Municipalities Act, 1965, besides being violative of the Article 14 and 300A of the Constitution of India and consequently set-aside the same. 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 to direct the Respondent No.2 herein not to interfere with the peaceful possession of the petitioner and dispossess him from the Petitioner’s Residential House No. 15/1834 (Old H.No. 15-348-B, Tadipatri Municipal Assessment No. 363), CB Road, Tadipatri, Ananthapuram District! A.P, during the pendency of the Writ Petition. Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI M K VISWANATH NAIDU Counsel for the Respondent No.1: GP FOR MUNCIPAL ADMN URBAN DEV Counsel for the Respondent No.2: SRI G LAKSHMI NARAYANA (SC FOR MUNICIPALITIES) The Court made the following: ORDER APHC010239692025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3460] FRIDAY,THE NINTH DAY OF MAY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE NYAPATHY VIJAY WRIT PETITION NO: 12762/2025 Between: Talari Pedda Sreenivasulu ...PETITIONER AND The State Of Andhra Pradesh and Others Counsel for the Petitioner: ...RESPONDENT{S) 1.M KVISWANATH NAIDU Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1.GP FOR MUNCIPAL ADMN URBAN DEV The Court made the following: 2 THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE NYAPATHY VIJAY WRIT PETITION NO: 12762 OF 2025 ORDER:- The present Writ Petition is filed questioning the action of the Respondent No.2 in issuing impugned Encroachment Notice vide NO.04/TPS/S-23/2-25 dated 25.04.2025 calling upon the petitioner to remove the Residential House No. 15/1834 (Old H.No.15-348-B, Tadipatri Municipal Assessment No.363), C.B.Road, Revenue Ward No.15, Tadipatri, Ananthapuramu District, without issuing any show-cause notice to the petitioner as illegal and arbitrary. The petitioner acquired the subject property by virtue of Registered Sale Deed vide Doc.No. 1073 of 2010 which in turn received the said property through partition deed No. 1305 of 1970. The petitioner was physical possession and enjoyment of the same, the petitioner is in possession. While 2. so, the impugned notice dated 25.04.2025 issued by the Respondent No.2 under Sections 189, 192, 194, 336, 360 and 361 of A.P.Municipality Act, 1965 calling upon the petitioner to remove the subject property as it is falling in canal area at Vijayanagar Colony Road. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the Respondent No.2 straight way issued the impugned notice dated 25.04.2025 directed the 3. 3 petitioner to vacate the subject property longstanding possession. cannot be sustained considering the 4. Learned Standing Counsel for the Respondents, on instructions, would submit that rain water can be stagnated in the canal area during rainy because of the construction of the petitioner. season. Therefore, impugned notice has been issued to the petitioner. 5. Considering the submissions made by the Court taking note of longstanding of hearing should be provided before taking further the petitioner. respective counsels, this possession of the petitioner, an opportunity course of action against 6. In that view, this Court is inclined to pass the following order: a) The petitioner shall submit a detailed explanation, claiming his right and title over the subject property in question, within a period of two (02) weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order- b) On such submission, the Respondent Authorities shall examine the same and pass appropriate orders in accordance with law, within a period of three (03) weeks thereafter. c) The Respondent Authorities shall hearing of the petitioner, if so required, d) Meanwhile, both the parties are directed to maintain status on date. also provide an opportunity of quo as 4 7. With the above direction, the writ petition is disposed of. No order as to costs. As a sequel, the miscellaneous petitions, if any, shall stand closed. //TRUE COPY// Sd/- K. TATA RAO DEPUTY REGISTRAR SEQTION OFFICER To, 1. The Principal Secretary, Municipal Administration and Urban Development Department, Secretariat, Velagapudi, Guntur District. 2. The Commissioner, Tadipatri Municipality, Tadipatri, Ananthapuram District 3. One CC to Sri M K Viswanath Naidu Advocate [OPUC] 4. One CC to Sri G Lakshmi Narayana, SC for Municipalities, Advocate [OPUC] 5. Two CCs to GP for Muncipal Admn Urban Dev, High Court of Andhra Pradesh. [OUT] 6. Three CD Copies TF / HIGH COURT DATED:09/05/2025 ORDER WP.No.12762 of 2025 DISPOSING OF THE W.P., WITHOUT COSTS