APHC010257192024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3333] MONDAY, THE TENTH DAY OF FEBRUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE V.SUJATHA WRIT PETITION NO: 12774/2024 Between: Bolla Likhitha ...PETITIONER AND The State Of A P and Others ...RESPONDENT(S) Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. V SUDHAKAR REDDY Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. GP FOR REVENUE 2. N RANGA REDDY (SC MC RSEEMA SPSR NLR) 3. GP MUNCIPAL ADMN AND URBAN DEV AP 4. Mattegunta.Sudhir,Standing Counsel For Z.P.Ps,M.P.Ps,Gram Panchayats 2 HVS,J W.P.No.12774 of 2024 The Court made the following: ORDER:- This Writ Petition is filed, under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking Mandamus, for the following relief: “…to issue an order direction or writ more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the 2nd respondent in proposing to demolish the residential house of the petitioner (plot no.1547) bearing Door No.1-278/99-19, Rajiv Nagar, Revenue Ward No.1, Srikalahasthi Municipality in highhanded manner without issuing any notice to the petitioner or affording an opportunity as illegal, arbitrary and violative of Principles of Natural Justices and also violative of Articles 14, 21 and 300-A of the Constitution of India and consequently direct the respondents not to demolish the house of the petitioner...” 2. The case of the petitioner is that she being a land less poor was allotted house site by the government for an extent of 95.33 Sq.yards in Plot No.1547 of Rajiv Nagar, Revenue Ward No.1 in Sy.No.225 of Thottambedu Revenue Village, Srikalahasthi Municipality in the year 2019 and she has been in possession and enjoyment of the possession by raising an asbestos roofed house therein and the same was assigned vide D.No.1-278/99-19. The petitioner was issued Possession Certificate vide Roc.C./426/2023, dated 15.04.2023 and she was also sanctioned an amount of Rs.1,80,000/- under Pradhana Mantri Awas Yojana (Urban Scheme) by the AP Housing Board in the year 2023 for construction of a pucca house and the said amount was credited to her account. Thereafter, the petitioner completed the construction of her building in the year 2023. 3 HVS,J W.P.No.12774 of 2024 3. While matter stood thus, the 2nd respondent suddenly informed the petitioner on 19.06.2024 that they are going to demolish the building within 3 days. The petitioner was neither served any notice nor they followed any due procedure. Aggrieved by the said illegal action, the petitioner filed the present writ petition. 4. Heard Sri. V. Sudhakar Reddy, the learned counsel for the petitioner and Smt. V. Sireesha Rani, the learned Standing Counsel for the 2nd respondent. 5. On 21.06.2024, this Court, while ordering notice before admission, granted interim order, which reads as under:- “the respondents are directed not to take any coercive steps against the petitioner till 01.07.2024.” 6. The 2nd respondent-Municipality filed counter affidavit, inter alia, contending that in the year 2020, the Government of Andhra Pradesh issued Ordinance No.17 of 2020 dated 31.12.2020 for merging of six Gram Panchayats including part of Thottambedu Grampanchayat. The said Gram Panchayats have not yet merged into Srikalahasti Municipality due to injunction order passed in W.P.No.17721 of 2021 and the matter is under subjudice. The subject property of the petitioner falls within the ambit of Plot No.1547 in Sy.No.225 of Thottambedu Revenue Village and as the subject property falls within the jurisdiction of Thottambedu Grampanchyat, it does not 4 HVS,J W.P.No.12774 of 2024 come within the jurisdiction of Srikalahasti Municipality and the Srikalahasti Municipality never levied the property tax to the alleged building. 7. The 2nd respondent-Municipality denied the fact that the 2nd respondent- Municipality is going to demolish the petitioner’s property within 3 days without issuing any notice or affording any opportunity, as the subject property is not within the jurisdiction of 2nd respondent-Municipality and the 2nd respondent never interfered with the said property. After completion of General Elections, 2024, the Revenue authorities have taken up the removal of encroachments in the Government lands. 8. In view of the fact that the 2nd respondent-Municipality never interfered with the petitioner’s possession over the subject property and considering the fact that the petitioner is in possession and enjoyment of the said house by virtue of the allotment made by the Government in his favour and also by virtue of the possession certificate issued by the revenue authorities on 15.04.2023, instead of keeping the writ petition pending, this Court feels it appropriate to dispose of the writ petition, directing the respondents not to interfere with the petitioner’s possession over the subject building. 9. Accordingly, this writ petition is disposed of and the respondent- Municipality is directed not to interfere with the possession and enjoyment of the petitioner over the subject property and in case, the 2nd respondent- Municipality is intended to acquire the subject land for any purpose, the 2nd 5 HVS,J W.P.No.12774 of 2024 respondent-Municipality shall follow the due procedure contemplated under law. There shall be no order as to costs. Consequently miscellaneous applications pending, if any, in the Writ Petition, shall also stand closed. ___________________ JUSTICE V.SUJATHA 10.02.2025 PGT