Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Andhra Pradesh · body

2025 DAILYLAW 28821 (AP)

VADLAMANU SUBBARAO v. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH

WP/20987/2025 · 2025-08-11

Gannamaneni Ramakrishna Prasad

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

APHC010411052025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) TUESDAY, THE TWELFTH DAY OF AUGUST TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE GANNAMANENI RAMAKRISHNA PRASAD WRIT PETITION NO: 20987 OF 2025 Between: 1. Vadlamanu Subbarao, S/o. V. Hanumantha Rao Aged 53 years Occ: Cultivation R/o. 3-172/5, Kunchenapalli Village Mangalagiri Mandal, Guntur District Andhra Pradesh 2. Vadlamanu Srinivas Rao, S/o. V. Hanumantha Rao Aged 50 years, Occ: Cultivation R/o. 3-172/5, Kunchenapalli Village Mangalagiri Mandal, Guntur District Andhra Pradesh 3. Vadlamanu Rambabu, S/o. V. Hanumantha Rao Aged 48 years, Occ: Cultivation R/o. 3-172/5, Kunchenapalli Village Mangalagiri Mandal, Guntur District Andhra Pradesh 4. A. Jaya Lakshmi, W/o. A. Ramesh Kumar Aged 58 years Occ: Housewife R/o. 0pp. VMSIT College, Yelahanka, Bangalore, Karnataka 5. Deepika’s PR Avenue Owners Welfare Association, (Reg. No 309/2018)12-464/5/1, Ashramam Road, Tadepalli Guntur District, Rep. by its President D.Venkateswara Rao, aged 47 years, S/o. Koteswara Rao ...Petitioners AND 1. The State of Andhra Pradesh, Rep. by its Principal Secretary Municipal Administration and Urban Development (I) Department A.P.Secretariat, Velagapudi Amaravati, Guntur District. 2. The Commissioner, A.P. C.R.D.A, Vijayawada N.T.R District, AP 3. The Commissioner, Mangalagiri-Tadepalli Municipal Corporation Mangalagiri, Guntur District, AP ...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 a writ of mandamus declaring the action of the respondents no. 2 and 3 in not proceeding to lay a road with a width of 40- feet from NH-65 to Karakatta through survey number's 90/3, 91, 65, 66, 67, 61, 60, 25, 24, and 23 of Tadepalli village and mandal, Guntur district as proposed and approved under the master plan issued vide G.O.M.S. No. 679 M.A.and U.D. (1) Department dt. 29-12-2006 and proposing to lay the said 40- feet road through survey number 68 and 69 of Tadepalli in deviation from master plan alignment also without any due process and authority of law, without notice and opportunity of hearing as highly illegal, arbitrary, and violative of principles of natural justice besides violative of article 19 and 300-A of the Constitution of India and consequently direct the respondents to form 40-feet road as per the alignment approved under G.O.M.S. No. 679 M.A.and U.D. (1) Department dt. 29-12-2006 without any deviation. 29-12-2006 without any deviation. 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 direct the Respondents not to lay a road through our property to an extent of Ac. 1.00 cents in survey number 68/a, Ac.0.40 cents in survey number 67/2, 68/a, & 5th Petitioner apartment constructed in survey number 69 of Tadepalli village and mandal, Guntur district by deviating from the master plan as approved under G.O.M.S No. 679 dt. 29-12-2006 pending disposal of the above writ petition. Counsel for the Petitioners: SRI K CHIDAMBARAM (SENIOR COUNSEL ) REPRESENTING SRI YASWANTH GADE Counsel for the Respondent No.1: GP FOR MUNCIPAL ADMN URBAN DEV Counsel for the Respondent No.3: SRI HARSHA AMMINENI REPRESENTING SRI A S C BOSE (SC FOR MUNICIPAL CORPORATIONS) Counsel for the Respondent No.2: SRI A RAM DHEERAJ REPRESENTING SMT. S PRANATHI The Court made the following order: 1 APHC010411052025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3328] TUESDAY. THE TWELFTH DAY OF AUGUST TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE GANNAMANENI RAMAKRISHNA PRASAD WRIT PETITION NO: 20987/2025 Between: 1.VADLAMANU SUBBARAO, S/0. V. HANUMANTHA RAO AGED 53 YEARS OCC CULTIVATION VILLAGE MANGALAGIRI MANDAL, GUNTUR DISTRICT ANDHRA PRADESH R/0. 3-172/5, KUNCHENAPALLI 2.VADLAMANU SRINIVAS RAO, S/0. V. HANUMANTHA RAO AGED 50 R/0. 3-172/5, KUNCHENAPALLI YEARS, OCC CULTIVATION VILLAGE MANGALAGIRI MANDAL, GUNTUR DISTRICT ANDHRA PRADESH 3.VADLAMANU RAMBABU, S/0. V. HANUMANTHA RAO AGED 48 R/0. 3-172/5, KUNCHENAPALLI YEARS, OCC CULTIVATION VILLAGE MANGALAGIRI MANDAL, GUNTUR DISTRICT ANDHRA PRADESH 4.A. JAYA LAKSHMI, W/0. A. RAMESH KUMAR AGED 58 YEARS OCC HOUSEWIFE R/O. OPP. VMSIT COLLEGE, YELAHANKA, BANGALORE, KARNATAKA 5.DEEPIKAS PR AVENUE OWNERS WELFARE ASSOCIATION, (REG. NO 309/2018)12-464/5/1, ASHRAMAM ROAD, TADEPALLI GUNTUR DISTRICT, REP. BY ITS PRESIDENT D.VENKATESWARA RAO, AGED 47 YEARS, S/0. KOTESWARA RAO ...PETITIONER(S) AND 2 1.THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL MUNICIPAL ADMINISTRATION AND DEPARTMENT SECRETARY URBAN A.P.SECRETARIAT, DEVELOPMENT VELAGAPUDI AMARAVATI, GUNTUR DISTRICT. (I) 2.THE COMMISSIONER, A.P. C.R.D.A, VIJAYAWADA N.T.R DISTRICT, AP 3.THE COMMISSIONER, CORPORATION MANGALAGIRI, GUNTUR DISTRICT AP MANGALAGIRI-TADEPALLI MUNICIPAL ...RESPONDENT(S): Counsel for the Petitioner(S): 1.YASWANTH GADE Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1.GP FOR MUNCIPAL ADMN URBAN DEV 2. A S C BOSE (SC FOR MUNICIPAL CORPORATIONS AP) 3.S PRANATHI The Court made the following: ORAL ORDER: Heard Sri K. Chidambaram, learned Senior Counsel assisted by Sri G. Yaswanth, learned Counsel for the Writ Petitioners, Sri Harsha Ammineni, learned Counsel appearing on behalf of Sri A.S.C. Bose, learned Standing Counsel for Municipal Corporations (Respondent No.3) and Sri A. Ram Dheeraj, learned Counsel appearing on behalf of Smt. S. Pranathi, learned Standing Counsel for APCRDA (Respondent No.2). The present Writ Petition is filed seeking the following relief; 2. “It is therefore prayed that this Hon’ble Court may be pleased to issue a writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of a writ of mandamus declaring the action of the respondent no.2 and 3 in not proceeding to lay a road with a width of 40-feet from NH- 65 to Karakatta through survey numbers 90/3, 91, 65, 66, 67, 61, 60, 25, 24 and 23 of Tadepalli village and 3 mandal, Guntur district as proposed and approved under the master plan issued vide M.A.&U.D.(1) Department dt. 29-12-2006 and proposing to lay the said 40-feet road through survey number 68 and 69 of Tadepalli in deviation from master plan alignment also without any due process and authority of law, without notice and opportunity of hearing as highly illegal, arbitrary and violative of principles of natural justice besides violative of article 19 and 300-A of the Constitution of India and consequently direct the respondents to form 40-feet road as per the alignment approved Department dt. 29-12-2006 without any deviation and pass such other order or orders as this Hon’ble Court may deem fit and proper in the circumstances of the case.” G.O.M.S.No.679 (1) M.A.&U.D. underG.O.M.S.No.679 When this matter was taken up for hearing, this Writ Petition was passed over to enable the learned Counsel for the Respondents to obtain Written Instructions. Sri Harsha Ammineni, learned Counsel appearing on behalf of Sri A.S.C. Bose, learned Standing Counsel for Respondent No.3, has submitted the Written Instructions furnished by the Commissioner of Respondent No.3 dated 12.08.2025. Copy of it is supplied to the Counsel for the Writ Petitioners as well and the same is taken on record. The relevant portion of the Written Instruction is usefully extracted hereunder: 3. “It is to submit that the Government of Andhra Pradesh has approved the Zonal Development Plan for Tadepalli Zone vide G.O.Ms.No.679 MA, dated 29-12- 2006, wherein a 40 feet wide road is proposed connecting NH-16 service road to Karakatta. The road in question is passing through the Sy.Nos.91, 65, 66, 67, 61, 60, 25, 24 and 23 of Tadepalli village as per the Tadepalli Zonal Development Plan issued vide G.O.Ms.No.679 MA, dated 29-12-2006. The entire road is a green field road as on the date of proposal in the master plan. The applicants have executed a gift deed for an extent of 1463.69 sqm towards approach road left by them duly registered in favour of the MTMC vide registered document No.5700/2025, dated 04-03-2025. In pursuant to the said gift deed, the approach road is vested with the MTMC. 1463.69sqm left by them towards approach road, remaining entire road is a green field road. The said approach road is passing through the Sy.No.65 of Except this portion of m Tadepalli village and the same is falling in the alignment of the 40 feet wide road proposed as per Tadepalli ZDP passing through theSy.Nos.9l, 65, 66, 67, 61, 60, 25, 24 and 23 of Tadepalli village. The existing position of the approach road gifted through the Doc.No.5700/2025 does not affect the alignment of the proposed Master Plan road as per ZDP. Thus, the allegation of the petitioners stating that the Respondent authorities have proposed to lay a road through the petitioners land by deviating from the approved master plan at the instance of one of the big builder etc are baseless and the petitioners may be put to strict proof of the same. The petitioners always have liberty to approach an appellate authority to express their grief.” 4. The above extract would indicate that the Official Respondents are not deviating from the Master Plan and are proceeding to lay the road as per the approved plan, as indicated in the above Written Instructions, and not on the land that belong to the Writ Petitioners herein. 5. In this view of the matter, this Court is of the opinion that this Writ Petition is not required to be considered any further. Accordingly, this Writ Petition is disposed of. No order as to costs. 6. Interlocutory Applications, if any, stand closed in terms of this order. Sd/- K TATA RAO REGISTRAR SECTION OFFICER //TRUE COPY// To, 1. The Principal Secretary, Municipal Administration and Urban Development (I) Department A.P.Secretariat, Velagapudi Amaravati, Guntur District. 2. The Commissioner, A.P. C.R.D.A, Vijayawada N.T.R District, AP 3. The Commissioner, Mangalagiri-Tadepalli Municipal Corporation Mangalagiri, Guntur District, AP 4. One CC to Sri Yaswanth Gade, Advocate [OPUC] 5. Two CCs to GP for Muncipal Admn Urban Pradesh [OUT] . 6. One CC to Sri A S C Bose (SC for Municipal Corporations) [OPUC] 7. One CC to Smt. S Pranathi, Advocate [OPUC] 8. Two CD Copies Dev, High Court of Andhra Advocate TF HIGH COURT DATED:12/08/2025 ORDER WP NO. 20987 OF 2025 |g 17 SEP 2025 .. * ^ Current Section DISPOSING OF THE W.P., WITHOUT COSTS