-1- W.P. No.24893 of 2025 Date of order:16.09.2025 APHC010480682025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3457] TUESDAY,THE SIXTEENTH DAY OF SEPTEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE HARINATH.N WRIT PETITION NO: 24893/2025 Between: Karri Gurumurthy ...PETITIONER AND The State Of Andhra Pradesh and Others ...RESPONDENT(S) Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. MANGENA SREE RAMA RAO Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. GP FOR REVENUE 2. GP MUNCIPAL ADMN AND URBAN DEV AP The Court made the following: -2- W.P. No.24893 of 2025 Date of order:16.09.2025 THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE HARINATH.N WRIT PETITION No.24893 OF 2025 ORDER: 1. The petitioner is aggrieved by the action of the respondents in interfering with his construction activity undertaken in plot No.2286 admeasuring 107 square yards in R.S. No.13, R.H.Colony, Sector-1, Vadlapudi Village, Gajuwaka Mandal, Visakhapatnam. 2. Heard the submissions of the learned counsel for the petitioner, the learned Government Pleader for Municipal Administration and Urban Development, the learned Standing Counsel for the Corporation, the learned Government Pleader for Land Acquisition, the learned Government Pleader for Revenue and the learned Standing Counsel for the Andhra Pradesh Eastern Power Distribution Company Limited. 3. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that one Kona Paidamma, wife of Kona Venkata Swamy, was allotted the subject plot under a Rehabilitation Card (R- Card) on 29.01.2002 and the Special Deputy Collector, Steel Plant, Visakhapatnam, has also confirmed her title. It is submitted that after the death of the said Kona Paidamma, her daughter, who is the vendor of the petitioner, has acquired a valid title by virtue of a Settlement Deed dated 05.12.2024. The petitioner thereafter purchased the said property under a duly registered sale deed. Subsequently, the petitioner applied for building permission and -3- W.P. No.24893 of 2025 Date of order:16.09.2025 was granted approval by the 2nd respondent on 13.08.2025 for construction of an individual residential building with stilt, ground plus (+) first floor. It is submitted that the respondent authorities, without issuing any notice, are attempting to dispossess the petitioner and obstruct the construction activity, in spite of the petitioner having obtained valid permission. 4. The learned standing counsel appearing for the 2nd respondent submits that certain shortfalls were noticed in the building application and that a complaint was received from a third party claiming title over the subject property. Based on such complaint, the authorities visited the site for verification. 5. Considering the submissions and the fact that no notice was issued to the petitioner, it is made clear that the respondents shall follow due process of law in the event of initiating any action against the petitioner. 6. With the above directions, the writ petition stands disposed of. No costs. 7. Miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending in this writ petition shall stand closed. ___________________ JUSTICE HARINATH.N BV