APHC010575472024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3330] WEDNESDAY, THE TWENTY NINETH DAY OF JANUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE TARLADA RAJASEKHAR RAO WRIT PETITION No: 30178/2024 BETWEEN: Mr. Tangudu Vishnu Murthy ...Petitioner AND State Of Andhra Pradesh and others ...Respondent(s) Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. V V SATISH Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. GP FOR PANCHAYAT RAJ RURAL DEV 2. MOHAMMAD NAYAB RASOOL The Court made the following: 2 ORDER: The present Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for the following relief/s: "….pleased to issue any writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the 3rd respondent in not taking action against the unauthorized constructions being made by the 4th respondent is illegal, arbitrary and violation of Article 14 of the Constitution of India and to consequently direct the 3rd respondent to take steps for demolition of unauthorized constructions in the land admeasuring 338.88 Sq. yards in Sy.No.62, Tekkali Village and Mandal, Srikakulam District by the 4th respondent and to pass such other or further orders….. 2. Pithily, the case of the petitioner in the present Writ Petition is that 4th respondent who is the unofficial respondent before this Court is proceeding with the construction without obtaining building permission from the 3rd respondent i.e. Tekkali Gram Panchayat and the 3rd respondent is conscious of the said facts, ignored its statutory obligation to stop and demolish the structures and thereby allowing the unauthorized constructions to go on. Hence, the present Writ Petition is filed to direct the 3rd respondent to take appropriate action against the unofficial respondents. 3 3. The 4th respondent filed counter affidavit asserting that the 4th respondent has obtained building permission from the 3rd respondent Gram Panchayat vide building permit No.1178/0043/B/TKI/RNP/2024 dated 19.09.2024, and further stated that the present Writ Petition is invented by circumventing the law, the Petitioner herein filed Suit O.S. No.37 of 2023 on the file of Junior Civil Judge Court, Tekkali for declaration and for consequential relief of permanent injunction and the suit was withdrawn invoking the provisions of Order 23 Rule 1 of the Code of Civil Procedure, the Petitioner has not approached this Court with clean hands, hence, prayed to dismiss the Writ Petition. 4. The 4th respondent constructed the building after obtaining permission from the Gram Panchayat. The present writ petition states that the 4th respondent constructed the building without obtaining permission. On closely examining the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned counsel for the respondents it is private dispute regarding title over the property and it is evident from the assertions of the writ affidavit that the dispute between the parties lies purely in the realm of private law and, therefore, the public law remedies that are available under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, are not available to resolve the dispute between 4 the parties in the present case. Mere fact that the State and its Departments are parties to agreement is of no consequence. It is trite that this Court will not exercise its jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India to entertain a writ petition wherein public law element is not involved. 6. Hence, the Writ Petition is stands dismissed. There shall be no order as to costs. As a sequel thereto, Interlocutory Applications pending, if any, shall stand closed. __________________________________ JUSTICE TARLADA RAJASEKHAR RAO Date: 29.01.2025 Harin 5 THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE TARLADA RAJASEKHAR RAO 136 WRIT PETITION No.30178 of 2024 Date: 29.01.2025 Harin