Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Andhra Pradesh · body

2025 DAILYLAW 33426 (AP)

SATHIVILLI SANKARA RAO v. THE STATE OF AP

WP/26565/2025 · 2025-10-05

Harinath N

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

1 HN, J W.P.No.26565_2025 APHC010501862025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3457] MONDAY,THE SIXTH DAY OF OCTOBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE HARINATH.N WRIT PETITION NO: 26565/2025 Between: 1. SATHIVILLI SANKARA RAO, S/O.CHANDRASEKHAR, AGED ABOUT 77 YEARS, R/0.D.N0.16-8-31/A, FAZULBEGHPETA, BHADRAMAHANKALI STREET, SRIKAKULAM TOWN AND DISTRICT. ...PETITIONER AND 1. THE STATE OF AP, REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, MUNICIPAL ADMINISTRATION URBAN DEVELOPMENT VELAGAPUDI, AMARAVATHI, GUNTUR DISTRICT. 2. SRIKAKULAM MUNICIPAL CORPORATION, SRIKAKULAM, SRIKAKULAM DISTRICT, REP. BY ITS COMMISSIONER, 3. MUDAGA PENTAYYA, S/O.VEERESALINGAM, AGED ABOUT 65 YEARS, R/O.D.NO.16-8-32, FAZULBEGHPETA, BHADRAMAHANKALI STREET, SRIKAKULAM TOWN AND DISTRICT. 4 4. MUDAGA VIJAYAKUMAR, S/O.PENTAYYA, AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS, R/O. D. N O. 16-8-32, FAZULBEG H PETA, BHADRAMAHANKALI STREET, SRIKAKULAM TOWN AND DISTRICT ...RESPONDENT(S): 2 HN, J W.P.No.26565_2025 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 Writ, or order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the inaction of the 2NDrespondent in not taking steps for cancellation of the building permission vide BA No. 1085/0200/B/SRI/F.T.A/2020 dt. 19.06.2021 granted in favour of respondents 3 and 4 as it was obtained by suppression of material facts and playing fraud as they have encroached the petitioners site an extent of 2.15 feet sy.No.114/1 of Fazulbeghpeta, Srikakulam Town without having any title inspite of written representations dt.03.08.2021, 07.02.2024 and 30.08.2025 made by the petitioner is as illegal, arbitrary and violation of principles of natural justice and also contrary to provision of Section 450 of A.P. Municipal Corporation Act, 1955 and consequently direct the 2ND respondent to take necessary steps for cancellation of building permission vide BA No. 1085/0200/B/SRI/F.T.A/2020 dt. 19.06.2021 granted to the respondents 3 and 4 duly considering the representations dt.03.08.2021. 07.02.2024 and 30.08.2025 made by the petitioner by exercising the power conferred under SEctoin 450 of A.P. Municipal Corporation Act 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 respondent .to take steps on the representations dt.03.08 2021, 07.02.2024 and 30.08.2025 made by the petitioner for cancellation of the building permission vide BA No. 1085/0200/B/SRI/F.T.A/2020 dt. 19.06.2021 as per the provision of Section 450 of A.P. Municipal Corporation Act, pending writ petition before the HonbLe Court and pass Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. S LAKSHMINARAYANA REDDY Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. MODHALAVALASA KRISHNA RAO 2. GP MUNCIPAL ADMN AND URBAN DEV AP 3 HN, J W.P.No.26565_2025 The Court made the following Order: 1. The petitioner is aggrieved by the inaction on the part of the respondent No.2 in disposing of the written representation dated 30.08.2025 which was proceeded by one more notice dated 07.02.2024. It is submitted that the petitioner and respondent Nos.3 and 4 are contesting in O.S.No.45 of 2021, on the file of the Principal Senior Civil Judge, Srikakulam. 2. It is further submitted that the Court granted status quo orders; however, the respondent Nos.3 and 4 suppressed the pending of the said suit and obtained permission for construction. This was brought to the notice of the respondent authorities through representations dated 30.08.2025 and 07.02.2024. However, no action has been taken by the respondent. 3. The learned Standing counsel appearing for the 2nd respondent submits that a representation of the petitioner shall be considered in accordance with law. 4. Recording the submission of the learned Standing counsel for the 2nd respondent, the writ petition is dispose off with a direction to 2nd respondent to dispose of the representations of the petitioner dated 03.08.2021, 07.02.2024, and 30.08.2025, within a period of ten weeks from the date of the receipt of a copy of this order. The respondent No.2 shall duly inform respondents Nos.3 and 4, call for their explanation, and provide a personal hearing to the petitioner and other concerned parties before passing any orders. There shall be no order as to costs. 4 HN, J W.P.No.26565_2025 Pending miscellaneous petitions, if any, shall stand closed. ___________________ JUSTICE HARINATH.N Date: 06.10.2025 NKA 5 HN, J W.P.No.26565_2025 56 HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE HARINATH.N Writ Petition No.26565 of 2025 Date: 06.10.2025 NKA