APHC010369602024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3460] TUESDAY ,THE EIGHTEENTH DAY OF MARCH TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE NYAPATHY VIJAY WRIT PETITION NO: 18869/2024 Between: P Koteswara Rao @ Kotaiah ...PETITIONER AND The State Of Andhra Pradesh and Others ...RESPONDENT(S) Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. SAI GANGADHAR CHAMARTY Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. S BALA MOHAN RANGA 2. A S C BOSE (SC FOR MUNICIPAL CORPORATIONS AP) 3. GP MUNCIPAL ADMN AND URBAN DEV AP The Court made the following: 2 THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE NYAPATHY VIJAY WRIT PETITION No. 18869 of 2024 ORDER: 1. The present Writ Petition is filed questioning the action of the Respondent Nos. 1 and 2 in not stopping the unauthorized constructions carried on by the Respondent No.3 in an extent of 60 Sq.yards situated in Plot No.185 in R.S.No.45, D.No.76-14-185A Assessment No.1073033154, Ward No.28 of Bhavanipuram, Vijayawada, eventhough the building permission No.1073/1318/B/VMA/ BHA/ 2002, dated 12.07.2022 was revoked by the Respondent No.2. 2. The Petitioner claims to be the absolute owner of the above mentioned property and his name was reflected in the Municipal Records as he is paying the property tax for the said property. 3. Learned Counsel for the Petitioner submits that Respondent No.3 had filed O.S.No.1517 of 2023 seeking injunction against the said property and while the said suit was pending, the Respondent No.2 was granted building permission in favour of the Respondent No.3. Though the respondent No.2 had revoked the said building permission pursuant to the written complaint, constructions were going on unabated. Hence, the present Writ Petition was filed. 3 4. Learned counsel for the Respondent No.2 filed Counter Affidavit stating that on verification of the records, it was found that the respondent No.3 had submitted a fabric patta and mislead the respondent No.2 in issuing the building permission. Thereafter, a show cause notice was issued on 05.05.2023 and the building permission was subsequently revoked by exercising power under section 450 of the APMC Act, 1955. Thereafter, the Respondent No.2 had demolished the construction raised by the Respondent No.3 on 23.08.2024 and photographs to that effect were filed in proof of the same. 5. As the grievance of the Petitioner is redressed by the Respondent No.2, no further orders need be passed in the present Writ Petition. 6. With the above observation, the Writ Petition is closed. There shall be no order as to costs. As a sequel, miscellaneous petitions, if any, shall stand closed. __________________ NYAPATHY VIJAY, J Date: 18.03.2025 eha 4 THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE NYAPATHY VIJAY WRIT PETITION No. 18869 of 2024 Date: 18.03.2025 eha U