4 ~ \ IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) APHC010429112023 THURSDAY,THE TWENTY SIXTH DAY OF JUNE TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE NYAPATHY VIJAY WRIT PETITION NO: 22010 OF 202.^ Between: Nekuri Soloman, S/o Sattiya, Aged about 52 Years, D.No. 6-39/2, Gas Godown Road, Lunani Nagar, Eluru Town West Godavari District, Andhra Pradesh Occ: Employee, R/o. and Mandal, ...PETITIONER AND 1. The State of Andhra Pradesh, Rep by its Principal Secretary Department, Secretariat Buildings, Velagapudi, Guntur District. 2. Eluru Municipal Corporation, Rep by its Commissioner Godavari District, AP. MA& UD Eluru, West ...RESPONDENTS of India praying that in the the High Court may be one in the nature of Writ or any other appropriate writ being filed challenging the passed by the 2"“ respondent vide Notice No 17/1075/ELR/UC/2023 19-08-2023 wk under I was instructed to bring down the construction within 7 days by confirming the show cause notice Dt. 18-04-2023 under section 452 . 1955 and as per sec 86, 89 (3), of without considering my explanation in right perspective is highly illegal, arbitrary exercise of power, contrary to the law Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith pleased to issue Order or direction more particularly of Mandamus order Dt. (2), 461 (2) of Municipal Corporations Act, APMR & UDA Act 2016 and violative of principles of Natural Justice and Consequently to the liable to be set aside or quashed. same is lA NO: 1 OF 2023 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 17/1075/ELRIUC/2023, Dt. 19-08-2023. Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI TURAGA SAI SURYA Counsel for the Respondent No.1: GP FOR MUNICIPAL ADMINISTRATION & URBAN DEVELOPMENT Counsel for the Respondent No.2:SRI J. DILEEP KUMAR, SC FOR MUNICIPAL CORPORATIONS all further proceedings pursuant to order Notice No The Court made the following: ORDER i* APHC010429112023 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3460] THURSDAY, THE TWENTY SIXTH DAY OF JUNE TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE NYAPATHY VIJAY WRIT PETITION NO: 22010/2023 Between: Nekuri Soloman ...PETITIONER AND The State Of Ap and Others ...RESPONDENT(S) Counsel for the Petitioner: 1.TURAGA SAI SURYA Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1.GP FOR MUNCIPAL ADMN URBAN DEV 2.J DILEEP KUMAR The Court made the following: % HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE NYAPATHY VIJAY WRIT PETITION No.22010 of 2023 ORDER: The present Writ Petition is filed questioning the order passed by the Respondent No.2 vide Notice No.17/1075/ELR/UC/2023, dated 19.08.2023 issued under Sections 452(2) and 461(2) of Andhra 1. Pradesh Municipal Corporations Act, 1955 and as per Sections 86 and 89(3) of APM & UDA Act, 2016, as illegal and arbitrary. The facts leading to filing of the present Writ Petition are as 2. follows;- The Petitioner claims to have purchased a property which consists RCC building bearing D.No.6-39/2 in Plot No. 182 situated in R.S.No.125/1 of L.P.No.29/2022, Lunani Nagar, Eluru from one Nasaka Mahalakshmi under a registered sale deed vide document No.9239/2015, dated 07.10.2015 and claims to be in possession and enjoyment of the same. The Petitioner’s vendor had applied for permission to the competent authority for construction of G + 1 RCC building and the same was granted vide Permit No. 110/2013-14, dated 15.03.2014. 2 3. It is stated that the approval of the building plan vendor of the Petitioner had and same applied for was said to have been Gram Panchayat dated approved by the Tangellamudi However, the Floor and sold the the Petitioner 15.03.2014. vendor of the Petitioner had constructed only Ground property and did not raise the First Floor While proposed to proceed with the further SO construction in the year 2023 and while he was proceeding with the construction, authority on a provisional notice 18.04.2023 Though the Petitioner the Respondent 19.08.2023. Hence, the was issued by the Respondent pointing out certain deviations in the explanation passed the confirmation present Writ Petition is filed. constructions. submitted his on 12.05.2023, authorities order on 4. Learned counsel for the Petitioner explanation the Petitioner authorities on 24.04.2023 and the building license. submits that prior to giving had also approached the Revenue also paid requisite amount for renewal of 5. The learned Standing Counsel would submit that the i With, as the construction is being proceeded without valid the building plan granted in favour of the Petitioner long time back. As for the Respondent-Corporation cannot be faulted approval, as s vendor had lapsed regards the renewal of the building plan, the learned impugned confirmation order 3 submit that though application fee was paid by furnished and therefore the Standing Counsel would the Petitioner, no documentation has not been completed. It is stated that the application submitted by the Petitioner remained in-complete and has not been documents were officially processed by the Department. would submit that documentation through the licensed of four (4) weeks from today and be enclosed to the building renewal learned counsel for the Petitioner 6. The necessary steps will be taken for technical person within a period necessary documentation would application submitted on 24.04.2023. Counsel would submit that the documents through the Licensed Technical would be considered by the building plan would be approved, if the The learned Standing should be submitted by the Petitioner Person (LTP) and then the same Respondent authorities and the 7. same in order. Taking note of the rival submissions, the Writ Petition is disposed of with the following directions;- (i) The Petitioner through the registered period of four (4) of the schedule property; 8. shall comply with the documentation process Licensed Technical Person (LTP) within a weeks for renewal/approval of the building plan (ii) On receipt of the Respondent authorities Within a further period of six (6) weeks- documentation from the Petitioner, the shall process the building plan renewal (iii) Till the building plan proceed with the construction 's approved, the Petitioner shall not (iv) No order as to costs. As a sequel, pending applications if any, shall stand closed. Sd/- K. SRINIVASA RAJU ASSISTANT REGISTRAR //TRUE COPY// To, SECTION OFFICER 1. The Principal Secretary, MA, Pradesh, Secretariat Buildings 2- The Commissi ' District, AP. Kumar, Advocate fOPUCl • Two CCS to GP for Municipal Administration High Court of Andhra Pradesh 6- Three CD Copies and UD department. State of Andhra ' '^®lagapudi, Guntur District oner, Eluru Municipal Corporation Eluru, West Godavari and Urban Development, • [OUT] ssb HIGH COURT DATED:26/06/2025 ORDER WP No.22010 of 2023 €! g( 0 5JUL2lt!5 Co DISPOSING OF THE W.P. WITHOUT COSTS