IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) THURSDAY, THE TWENTY NINETH DAY OF MAY j TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE ) PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE CHALLA GUNARANJAN WRIT PETITION NO: 14017 OF 2025 Between: Eda Nagaiah, S/o. Late E. Samipaiah, Aged 74 years, Occ: Retd. Employee R/o HNo: 21-34/15/1, Viman Nagar, NAD, Visakhapatnam ...PETITIONER AND 1. State of Andhra Pradesh, Rep. by its PrI. Secretary, Municipal Administration and Urban Development, Secretariat, Velagapudi Guntur. 2. Greater Visakhapatnam Municipal Corporation, Rep. by its Commissioner, Dwaraka Nagar, Visakhapatnam. 3. Asst. City Planner, GVMC, Zone VIII Dwaraka Nagar, Visakhapatnam. 4. Town Planning Officer, Greater Visakhapatnam Municipal Corporation Dwaraka Nagar, Visakhapatnam. ...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 declaring the provisional order of the 3 respondent vide Notice No.02/2025/ACP-VIII/WPRS-21086475 dated 26.05.2025 issued by the 3'"^ Respondent and served on the petitioner through whatsapp on 27.05.2025 stating that the building constructed by the petitioner vide permit No 1086/3811/B/Z8/GON/2024 dated 15.11.2024 admeasuring 220sqyds in survey No 59/15 in Plot No 9 of Gopalapatnam Village, Visakhapatnam District is in deviation to the plan and shall be pulled rd down by the petitioner, else action will be iniated by the 3^^ respondent as illegal, irregular, irrational and arbitrary, unjust and violative of Articles 14 and 21 of constitution of India and set aside the same and consequently suspend the provisional order of 3rd respondent vide Notice NO.02/2025/ACP- VIIl/WPRS-21086475 dated 26.05.2025, as without jurisdiction. 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 suspend the provisional order of 3'^ respondent vide Notice NO.02/2025/ACP-VIII/WPRS-21085475 dated 26.05.2025, as without jurisdiction and in violation of principles of natural justice pending disposal of the above writ petition. Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI M. SOLOMON RAJU Counsel for the Respondent No.1: GP FOR MUNCIPAL ADMINISTRATION AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT Counsel for the Respondent Nos.2 to 4:SRI A.S.C.BOSE, SC FOR MUNICIPAL CORPORATIONS The Court made the following: ORDER \ APHC010278382025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3506] THURSDAY, THE TWENTY NINETH DAY OF MAY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE CHALLA GUNARANJAN WRIT PETITION NO: 14017/2025 Between: Eda Nagaiah ...PETITIONER AND State Of Andhra Pradesh and Others Counsel for the Petitioner: ...RESPONDENT(S) 1.M SOLOMON RAJU Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1.GP MUNCIPAL ADMN AND URBAN DEVAP The Court made the following order: Learned Government Pleader for Municipal Administration takes notice for respondent 1. Sri A.S. Bose, learned Standing Counsel for Municipal Corporation takes notice for respondents 2 to 4. The present writ petition is filed seeking following relief: ‘‘....to issue a writ order or direction more particuiarly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the provisional order of the 3rd respondent vide Notice NO. 02/2025/ACPVIII/WPRS21086475 dated 26.05.2025 issued by the 3^^ Respondent and served on petitioner through whatsapp 27.05.2025 stating that the building constructed by the petitioner vide permit No. 1086/3811/B/Z8/GON/2024 dated 15.11.2024 admeasuring 220 sq.yds in survey No. 59/15 in Plot No.9 of Gopalapatnam Village Visakhapatnam District is in deviation to the plan and shall be pulled down by the petitioner else action will be initiated by the 3rd respondent as illegal irregular irrational and arbitrary unjust and violative of Articles 14 and 21 of constitution of India and set aside the same and consequently suspend the provisional order of 3rd respondent vide Notice No VIII/WPRS210864 75 dated 26.05.2025 jurisdiction and to pass..” The petitioner was granted building permission on 15.11.2024 for construction of (G+2). Now the 4^'" respondent has issued notice dated 10.03.2025, alleging that the petitioner has been constructing the building with certain deviations and also pointed out the nature of deviation and called upon the petitioner to subject explanation. The petitioner submitted explanation immediately on 12.03.2025, later submitted another explanation on 13.05.2025, after this Court allowed the petitioner to do so by orders in W.P.No.10536 of 2025. The respondent has passed the on 02/2025/ACP as without 2. NO.02/2025/ACP-VIII/WPRS- impugned order vide Notice 21086475, dated 26.05.2025, under section 452 (2) 461 read with 428, 429 of APMC Act, 1955. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the impugned order does not refer to the petitioner’s explanations dated 12.03.2025 & 13.05.2025 and straight away come to a conclusion to remove the structure holding that there are deviations in the construction. 3. Learned Standing Counsel for respondents would submit that though petitioners submitted explanation to the 4*'' respondent, the 3"^ respondent is the authorized to pass the final order, however he does not dispute the factum of petitioner submitting explanations which are neither referred to nor considered in the impugned order dated 26.05.2025. 4. Impugned order does not refer to any of the explanations submitted by the petitioner and on the other hand states that no reply has been submitted to the show-cause notice 5. dated 10.03.2025. On the said ground itself, the impugned order dated 26.05.2025, passed by the 3'"^ respondent, is hereby set aside and the matter is remitted back to the 3'"'^ respondent to 12.03.2025 and consider petitioner’s explanation dated 13.05.2025 and pass appropriate speaking order within a period of four (04) weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. Accordingly, the Writ Petition is disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs. 6. As a sequel, miscellaneous applications pending shall stand closed. if any, Sd/-G.HELA NAIDU ASSISTANT REGISTRAR //TRUE COPY// SECTION OFFICER 1. The PrI. Secretary, Municipal Administration and Urban Development, state of Andhra Pradesh, Secretariat, Velagapudi, Guntur. 2. The Commissioner, Greater Visakhapatnam Municipal Corporation, Dwaraka Nagar, Visakhapatnam. 3. The Asst. City Planner, GVMC. Zone VIII Dwaraka Visakhapatnam. 4. The own Planning Officer, Greater Visakhapatnam Municipal Corporation Dwaraka Nagar, Visakhapatnam. 5. One CC to Sri M. Solomon Raju, Advocate [OPUC] 6. One CC to Sri A.S.C. Bose, SC for Municipal Corporations[OPUC ] 7. Two CCs to GP for Municipal Administration and Urban High Court of Andhra Pradesh. [OUT] 8. Three CD Copies. To, Nagar, Development, ssb f HIGH COURT DATED:29/05/2025 ORDER WP.No.14017 of 2025 DISPOSING OF THE W.P. WITHOUT COSTS