1 APHC010364932019 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3329] SATURDAY, THE THIRTIETH DAY OF AUGUST TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE VENKATESWARLU NIMMAGADDA WRIT PETITION NO: 17604/2019 Between: 1. KOLLI LAKSHMAIAH,, S/O RATTAIAH, AGED ABOUT 65 YEARS, RIO D.NO- 3-82, PONUGOTIVARIPALEM, CHITTAPURAM PANCHAYAT IPURU MANDAL. GUNTUR- 522647. ...PETITIONER AND 1. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP BY ITS PRL SECRETARY PANCHAYATI RAJ DEPT, VELAGAPUDI, AMARAVATHI, GUNTUR DISTRICT. 2. THE COLLECTOR, GUNTUR DISTRICT 3. THE SPECIAL OFFICER, PONUGOTIVARIPALEM, CHITTAPURAM PANCHAYAT, IPURU MANDAL, GUNTUR- 522647. 4. GUNTUPALLI SUBBAIAH, S/O RANGAIAH AGED ABOUT 65 YEARS, R/O PONUGOTIVARIPALEM, CHITTAPURAM PANCHAYAT IPURU MANDAL, GUNTUR-522647. ...RESPONDENT(S): 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 grant appropriate orders more specifically issuing of a Writ of Prohibition under Article 226 of Constitution of India or any other appropriate Writ order or direction declaring the action of the 4th respondent is violation of law in taking up construction of Rama Temple in Ponugotivaripalem Village and against the Panchayat Raj Act. Inspite of representations made by me the remaining respondents failed to take necessary action in implementing the law and direct the 2 respondent No.1 to 3 to take necessary action in this regard and order to take up the construction work of Rama Temple in Ponugotivaripalem village of Ipuru Mandal after obtaining permission with plan of Panchayat without violating the law as mandated under Panchayat Raj Act and pass IA NO: 1 OF 2019 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 stay the construction work of Rama Temple in Ponugotivaripalem village of Ipuru mandal pending disposal of the above Writ Petition and pass Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. SRINIVASA RAO NARRA Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. I KOTI REDDY 2. GP FOR PANCHAYAT RAJ RURAL DEV (AP) 3. Mattegunta.Sudhir,Standing Counsel For Z.P.Ps,M.P.Ps,Gram Panchayats The Court made the following: 3 THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE VENAKTESWARLU NIMMAGADDA WRIT PETITION NO.17604 of 2019 ORDER: 1. This writ petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking the following relief: “..to issue a writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of WRIT OF MANDAMUS under Article 226 of the Constitution of India declaring the action of the 4th respondent is violation of law in taking up construction of Rama Temple in Ponugotivaripalem Village and against the Panchayat Raj Act. Inspite of representations made by me the remaining respondents failed to take necessary action in implementing the law and direct the respondent No.1 to 3 to take necessary action in this regard and order to take up the construction work of Rama Temple in Ponugotivaripalem village of Ipuru Mandal after obtaining permission with plan of Panchayat without violating the law as mandated under Panchayat Raj Act and pass...” 2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Assistant Government Pleader appearing for respondents. 3. Pending the Writ Petition, the construction of the Rama Temple in the 3rd respondent’s village was completed without obtaining the necessary permissions as contemplated under the provisions of Panchayat Raj Act, 1992 and Rules made thereunder. 4. The petitioner is requested to grant liberty to the petitioner to submit a detailed representation to the 3rd respondent, requesting 4 appropriate action against the illegal construction of the Rama Temple by the 4th respondent and others. 5. The learned Standing Counsel for respondent No.3 submits that, during the pendency of the Writ Petition, the entire construction has been completed and the temple has been functional since 3 years. He contends that no cause survives for adjudication and that the petition is liable to be dismissed. 6. Considering the submissions of both the counsel and on perusal of the material on record, in view of the completion of the construction during the pending of the Writ Petition, the petitioner herein requested to submit a detailed representation seeking for initiation of due process of law for demolition of the subject temple, if it was constructed without the requisite permissions as contemplated under law. 7. Accordingly, the petitioner is granted liberty to submit a detailed representation ventilating his grievance against the alleged illegal construction made if any by the 4th respondent and others. 5 8. With the above directions, the writ petition is disposed of. There shall not order as to costs. As a sequel, interlocutory applications if any pending, shall stand closed. _____________________________________ JUSTICE VENKATESWARLU NIMMAGADDA Date: 30.08.2025 SR 6 THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE VENAKTESWARLU NIMMAGADDA WRIT PETITION NO.17604 of 2019 Date: 30.08.2025 SR