1 APHC010465562015 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3333] FRIDAY, THE THIRD DAY OF JANUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE V.SUJATHA WRIT PETITION NO: 7018/2015 Between: Ketha Sesha Ratnam ...PETITIONER AND The State of Andhra Pradesh and others ...RESPONDENT(S) Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. DASARI S V V S V PRASAD Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. Sireesha Rani Vallabhaneni,Standing Counsel For Municipalities 2. GP-MUNCIPAL ADMN AND URBAN DEV(AP) 3. TURAGA SAI SURYA The Court made the following: 2 ORDER: This Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking the following relief:- “….to issue a Writ, Order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the inaction on the part of the Respondents 1 to 4 upon the representations of the petitioner dated 26.01.2015 and 13.02.2015 against the illegal and unauthorized construction by the Respondent No.5 on the cellar, 1st floor, 2nd floor, 3rd floor and 4th floor without obtaining permission by violating the A.P. Municipal Building Rules without leaving setbacks and open spaces in the property bearing Municipal No.3-5-1, BRMV High School Ground, Palakol, West Godavari District which is in violation of the A.P. Municipal Building Rules and the fundamental rights guaranteed by the Constitution of India under Article 14 of the Constitution of India in the interest of justice….” 2. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel appearing for the respondents. 3. At the stage of admission, this Court on 25.03.2015 this Court granted interim order, operative portion of which reads as under: “In that view of the matter, the 4th respondent is to ensure that the 5th respondent shall not make any construction in the subject property, without building permission.” 4. When the matter is taken up today, learned Standing Counsel appearing on behalf of the 4th respondent Municipality has furnished a copy of the instructions dated 02.01.2025 of the 4th respondent, wherein it is stated that in pursuance of the representations made by the petitioner on 03.02.2015 under RTI Act, the 4th respondent issued endorsement on 02.03.2015 identifying 3 certain setbacks in the Sanction and unauthorized constructions made by the 5th respondent in violation of the approved plan. It is further stated that as this reason Provisional notice dated 25.11.2013 and C.O. on 4.12.2013 under Section 217(1) & (2) of the A.P. Municipalities Act was issued to the 5th respondent. But, however, the A.P. State Government issued G.O.Ms.No.128 MAUD dated 22.05.2015 on Building penalization Scheme (BPS). In pursuance of which, the 5th respondent submitted his application for penalization vide BPS/PAL/2/0334715 and the same is regularized on 01.03.2017 on payment of penalization charges. It is further stated that there are no Government land encroachments in the said construction and the plot is an approved layout in L.P.No.13/74 in plot No.10. 5. In view of the fact that the unauthorized constructions made by the 5th respondent were regularized in the year 2017, this Court is of the opinion that no cause survives in the writ petition. 6. Accordingly, the Writ Petition is closed. No costs. As a sequel, Interlocutory Applications pending, if any, in this Writ Petition, shall stand closed. __________________ JUSTICE V.SUJATHA Date: 03.01.2025 KGR