APHC010367082025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3457] TUESDAY,THE TWENTY NINETH DAY OF JULY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE HARINATH.N WRIT PETITION NO: 18706/2025 Between: 1. KOMMINENI PADMA, , W/O. SRINIVASULU AGED ABOUT 49 YEARS, OCC- HOUSEWIFE HOUSE NO. 18-57, KATURIVARIPALEM VILLAGE PODILI VILLAGE AND MANDAL PRAKASAM DISTRICT. ...PETITIONER AND 1. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, , REP.BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETAIY, MUNICIPAL ADMINISTRATION AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT A.P SECRETARIAT, VELAGAPUDI, AMARAVATHI GUNTUR DISTRICT. 2. THE PODILI MUNICIPALITY, REP., BY ITS COMMISSIONER. PODILI MANDAL PRKASAM DISTRICT. ...RESPONDENT(S): Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. VENKATESWARLU GADA Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. GP MUNCIPAL ADMN AND URBAN DEV AP 2 The Court made the following Order: The petitioner is aggrieved by the action of the 2nd respondent in interfering with the possession and enjoyment of the property with respect to house No.18-57,Katurivaripalem Village, Podili Village and Mandal, Prakasam District. 2. It is submitted that the neighbour of the petitioner approached this Court and filed W.P.No.30977 of 2023 challenging the notice dated 17.11.2023 which was set aside by this Court by order dated 30.11.2023 in W.P.No.30977 of 2023. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the notice dated 17.11.2023 is neither addressed to the petitioner nor the 2nd respondent has referred to the address of the petitioner. However, by flashing the said notice the 2nd respondent is trying to interfere with the possession of the petitioner. 4. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Standing Counsel for the 2nd respondent. 5. The notice dated 17.11.2023 is neither addressed to the petitioner nor there is any reference to the petitioner’s address or property. All that are referred to in the notice dated 17.11.2023 are the orders passed by this Court in W.P.No.19704 of 2022. 6. Considering the submissions and after perusing the record, the impugned notice dated 17.11.2023 cannot give cause of action to the 2nd 3 respondent to take any action against the petitioner. The notice dated 17.11.2023 is not only vague but also would have to be considered as a notice without name and address. On these grounds, the impugned notice dated 17.11.2023 is hereby set aside and any action which the 2nd respondent intends to take against the petitioner would have to be by following due procedure of law. 7. Accordingly, the Writ Petition is disposed of. No costs. Pending miscellaneous petitions, if any, shall stand closed. ______________________ JUSTICE HARINATH.N Date : 29.07.2025 Ivd 4 THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE HARINATH.N WRIT PETITION No.18706 of 2025 Date: 29.07.2025 Ivd