APHC010509852025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH (Special Original Jurisdiction) MONDAY,THE TWENTY SECOND DAY OF SEPTEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE HARINATH.N WRIT PETITION NO: 26220/2025 Between: 1. TANISH HALPANI, S/O BHARAT HALPANI, AGED 23 YEARS, OCC. PLYWOOD BUSINESS, R/O D.NO.26 CHINAGANTYADA OLD GAJUWAKA, VISAKHAPATNAM. 1. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, MUNICIPAL ADMINISTRATION, SECRETARIAT, VELAGAPUDI, GUNTUR DISTRICT. 2. THE GREATER VISAKHAPATNAM MUNICIPAL CORPORATION, REP BY ITS COMMISSIONER, VISAKHAPATNAM. 3. THE GREATER VISAKHAPATNAM MUNICIPAL CORPORATION, REP. BY ITS ZONAL COMMISS VISAKHAPATNAM DISTRICT. 4. THE GREATER VISAKHAPATNAM MUNICIPAL CORPORATION, REP. BY ITS ASSITANT CITY PLANNER, GAJUWAKA ZONE, VISAKHAPATNAM DISTRICT. Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. S A V RATNAM IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) MONDAY,THE TWENTY SECOND DAY OF SEPTEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE HARINATH.N WRIT PETITION NO: 26220/2025 TANISH HALPANI, S/O BHARAT HALPANI, AGED 23 YEARS, OCC. PLYWOOD BUSINESS, R/O D.NO.26 -34- 11, CHAITANYANAGAR, CHINAGANTYADA OLD GAJUWAKA, VISAKHAPATNAM. ...PETITIONER AND THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, MUNICIPAL ADMINISTRATION, SECRETARIAT, VELAGAPUDI, GUNTUR DISTRICT. THE GREATER VISAKHAPATNAM MUNICIPAL CORPORATION, REP BY ITS COMMISSIONER, VISAKHAPATNAM. THE GREATER VISAKHAPATNAM MUNICIPAL CORPORATION, REP. BY ITS ZONAL COMMISSIONER, GAJUWAKA ZONE, VISAKHAPATNAM DISTRICT. THE GREATER VISAKHAPATNAM MUNICIPAL CORPORATION, REP. BY ITS ASSITANT CITY PLANNER, GAJUWAKA ZONE, VISAKHAPATNAM DISTRICT. ...RESPONDENT(S): Counsel for the Petitioner: IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH [3457] MONDAY,THE TWENTY SECOND DAY OF SEPTEMBER TANISH HALPANI, S/O BHARAT HALPANI, AGED 23 YEARS, OCC. 11, CHAITANYANAGAR, ...PETITIONER THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, MUNICIPAL ADMINISTRATION, SECRETARIAT, THE GREATER VISAKHAPATNAM MUNICIPAL CORPORATION, REP THE GREATER VISAKHAPATNAM MUNICIPAL CORPORATION, IONER, GAJUWAKA ZONE, THE GREATER VISAKHAPATNAM MUNICIPAL CORPORATION, REP. BY ITS ASSITANT CITY PLANNER, GAJUWAKA ZONE, ...RESPONDENT(S): 2 Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. GP MUNCIPAL ADMN AND URBAN DEV AP The Court made the following: 3 Order: The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is aggrieved by the proceedings dated 16.09.2025 whereby the petitioner is informed of the deviations in the construction and the petitioner is called upon to explain as to why the deviated portion of the construction should not be pulled down. The petitioner is required to submit an explanation within seven (07) days. 2. It is submitted that though the Provisional Order dated 16.09.2025, the officers of the 2nd respondent are subsequently visiting the petitioner and the premises and threatening with demolition. 3. The learned Standing Counsel for the respondent Nos.2 to 4, upon written instructions, submits that the petitioner obtained permission for construction of stilt + ground + two upper floors. However, the petitioner was in the process of converting the stilt into commercial premises by erecting the shutters. It is submitted that the petitioner was informed not to convert the stilt area into a commercial area and accordingly, the petitioner removed the shutters further without submitting any explanation to the notice dated 16.09.2025 and had approached this Court. It is also submitted that the petitioner would have to submit an explanation to the Provisional Order, and upon submission of the explanation, the respondents shall pass appropriate orders. 4. Considering the submissions of the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Standing Counsel for the respondent Nos.2 to 4, the petitioner 4 shall submit a detailed explanation to the Provisional Order dated 16.09.2025 (served on 19.09.2025), and the respondents shall issue appropriate orders after duly considering the representation/explanation of the petitioner. It is also made clear that the petitioner shall not convert the stilt area into commercial premises, pending consideration of the representation/reply submitted by the petitioner to the said Provisional Order. 5. Accordingly, the Writ Petition is disposed off. No costs. 6. Pending miscellaneous petitions, if any, shall stand closed. _______________________ JUSTICE HARINATH.N Date : 22.09.2025 PNS