APHC010459032025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3329] WEDNESDAY,THE SEVENTEENTH DAY OF SEPTEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE VENKATESWARLU NIMMAGADDA WRIT PETITION NO: 24099/2025 Between: 1. SIRIGIRI SRINIVASULU, SON OF NARASIMHUDU, AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS, OCC. AGRICULTURE, RESIDENT OF D.NO.2-32, SC COLONY, NEHRU NAGAR VILLAGE PAGIDYALA MANDAL, NANDYALA DISTRICT. ...PETITIONER AND 1. THE STATE OF AP, REP BY ITS PRINCIPLE SECRETARY, IRRIGATION DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT, VELAGAPUDI, AMARAVATI, GUNTUR, DISTRICT. 2. THE COLLETOR AND DISTRICT MAGISTRATE, NANDAYALA DISTRICT, NANDYALA. 3. THE REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER, ATMAKURU, NANDAYALA DISTRICT. 4. THE TAHSILDHAR, PAGIDYALA MANDAL, NANDYALA DISTRICT. 5. THE NEHRU NAGAR GRAMA PANCHAYAT, REP BY ITS SECRETARY, NEHRU NAGAR VILLAGE, PAGIDYALA MANDAL, NANDYALA DISTRICT. 6. THE SUPERINTENDENTING ENGINEER, WATER RESOURCE DEAPARTMENT, NANDYAL DISTRICT. 7. THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, KC CANAL DIVISION, NANDYAL, NANDYAL DISTRICT. 2 8. KATAM PEDDA SWAMULU, SON OF PAKIRAIAH, RESIDENT OF NEHRU NAGAR VILLAGE, PAGIDYALA MANDAL, NANDYALA DISTRICT. ...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 topleased to issue an appropriate Writ, Order or Direction, more particularly one in the nature of a Writ of Mandamus, declaring the inaction of the Respondents not removing the illegal encroachment on the government land which is classified as a KCC Kalava Poraboku in Survey No. 266A, an extent of Ac. 0.06 cents of Muchumarri Village, Pagidyala Mandal, Nandyala District, where the unofficial respondents are constructing a church without obtaining any permission from the competent authorities, as illegal, arbitrary, and contrary to G.O. Ms. No. 376, Panchayat Raj and Rural Development Department, dated 29.11.2012, and in violation of Articles 14 and 21 of the Constitution of India and consequently direct the Respondents to forthwith remove the said illegal constructions/e ncroachments in Survey No. 266A, Muchumarri Village, Pagidyala Mandal, Nandyala District, by duly considering the representations submitted by the Petitioner and pass IA 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 Pleased to direct the Respondents to consider the representation dated 27.06.2025 submitted by the Petitioner and to take immediate and appropriate action against the illegal occupations/encroachments in Survey No. 266A, Muchumarri Village, Pagidyala Mandal, Nandyala District, pending disposal of the main Writ Petition and pass Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. PATHI SIVA PRASAD Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. GP FOR REVENUE 2. GP FOR IRRI AND CAD The Court made the following: 3 THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE VENKATESWARLU NIMMAGADDA WRIT PETITION NO: 24099/2025 ORDER: This writ petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of the India seeking the following reliefs:- “to issue a writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the inaction of the respondents not removing the illegal encroachment on the government land which is classified as a KCC Kalava Poraboku in Survey No.266A, an extent of Ac.0.06 cents of Muchumarri Village, Pagidyala Mandal, Nandyala District, where the unofficial respondents are constructing a church without obtaining any permission from the competent authorities, as illegal, arbitrary, and contrary to G.O.Ms.No.376, Panchayat Raj and Rural Development Department, dated 29.11.2012, and in violation of Articles 14 and 21 of the Constitution of India and consequently direct the respondents to forthwith remove the said illegal constructions/encroachments in Survey No.266A, Muchumarri Village, Pagidyala Mandal, Nandyala District, by duly considering the representations submitted by the petitioner and pass such other order.” 2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner, learned Government Pleader for Revenue for respondent Nos.2 to 4 and the learned Standing Counsel for respondent No.5. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is a permanent resident of respondent No.5/Gram Panchayat and also neighbour of the subject Government land, where the 8th respondent has proposed to make a construction by encroaching the said land, without there being any valid permission in his favour. Even though, the petitioner submitted a representation 4 dated 27.06.2025 bringing to the notice of respondent No.2 herein about the illegal construction of church by respondent No.8 on and over the Government canal poramboke land, having received the same, either respondent No.2 or any other respondents particularly respondent No.5 neither considered the representation and acted upon nor replied to the petitioner. Hence, the Writ Petition. 4. On the other hand, learned Government Pleader for respondent Nos.2 to 4 furnished written instructions issued by respondent No.4 dated 10.09.2025, wherein it is stated as follows: “As per RSR the land is in Sy.No.266A, extent:269.12 acres is classified as Government Poramboke K.C.Canal. The Executive Engineer, K.C. Canal Division, Nandyal District Minority Welfare Officer, Kurnool, Tahsildar & Mandal Surveyor Pagidyala, have jointly inspected the subject site. During the inspection, it is ascertained that the land in question is in Muchumarri Revenue Village limits of Pagidyala Mandal. The land falls in Sy.No.266/A, which is classified as KCC Poramboke Channel as per RSR. The land in question is about 260 meters away from KC Canal bund. The area of construction is 5 cents and the building is constructed up to roof level. Some of the villagers are objecting the construction of new church as there are other community people also living close to the said site. Upon enquiry it is revealed that the Church under construction will be the 3rd one in the village 5 Nehru Nagar as there are already 2 Churches functioning in Nehru Nagar. In view of the above, it is recommended to stop the construction of new church in objectionable KCC poramboke land in Nehrunagar Village of Pagidyala Mandal.” 5. Learned Government Pleader further submits that in view of the representation/complaint received from the petitioner, respondent No.4 physically inspected the subject property and stopped the proposed construction of 8th respondent, since it is classified as an objectionable land to make any construction. 6. Considering the submissions made by the counsels for all the parties and on perusal of the material placed on record and the written instructions of respondent No.4, it is observed that the subject land where the 8th respondent is proposing to make a construction of a place of worship i.e., Church is an objectionable land and it is classified as Government canal poramboke. In fact the said allegation of the petitioner was confirmed by respondent No.4 through his written instructions stating that the subject land where the 8th respondent proposed to make construction is an objectionable land and classified as Government canal poramboke. It is well known principle of settled law that no construction can be permitted against the Government objectionable lands, muchless, which are classified as water poramboke or river poramboke. 6 Moreover, for construction of any place of worship, respondent No.2 is the competent authority for granting permission as envisaged under Rule 26 of the Andhra Pradesh Gram Panchayat Land Development (Layout and Building) Rules, 2002. Admittedly, pursuant to the instructions of respondent No.4, no such permission was granted in favour of 8th respondent. In the absence of the same and in view of the facts as stated above, compels the conclusion that the proposed construction of place of worship is contrary to law. Hence, the respondent Nos.2 to 5 are hereby directed not to allow any constructions in the objectionable land, particularly, in the subject land by the 8th respondent or by any others. Further, if any constructions are found, the respondents are at liberty to proceed further to remove the same, in accordance with law. 6. With the above direction, the Writ Petition is disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs. As a sequel miscellaneous application, pending, if any, shall also stand closed. ________________________________ VENKATESWARLU NIMMAGADDA, J 1177..0099..22002255 TTPPSS 7 56 HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE VENKATESWARLU NIMMAGADDA WRIT PETITION NO:24099 of 2025 1177..0099..22002255 TTPPSS