IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH :: AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) WEDNESDAY, THE TWENTY SECOND DAY OF JANUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HON’BLE SMT JUSTICE V.SUJATHA WRIT PETITION NO: 30912 OF 2013 Between: M/s. The City of Destiny Clubs & Resorts, A registered Partnership Firm, Having its Office at 18-1-70, 2nd Floor, Krishna Tej- S Plaza, K.G.H. Down Road, Visakhapatnam, Rep. by its Managing Partner, Sri. B.N. Murthy, Aged about 48 years, S/o.B.Venkateswara Rao. ...PETITIONER AND 1. The Greater Visakhapatnam Municipal Corporation, Rep. by its Commissioner, GVMC Buildings, Asilmetta, Visakhapatnam. 2. The Govt, of A.P., Dept of Tourism and Culture and Youth Advancement, Rep. by its Secretary, 'D' Block, 1st Floor, A.P. Secretariat, Hyderabad. ...RESPONDENTS Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India is filed praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased to issue a Writ, Order or Direction, more particularly one in the nature of a "Writ of Mandamus" declaring the action of 1st Respondent Corporation in seeking to interfere with the possession and occupation and demolish the structures of the Petitioner to an extent of Ac.3.00 cents situated in Sy.No.62/4 of Rushikonda village, Visakhapatnam Rural Mandal, Visakhapatnam District as illegal, arbitrary and violative of Articles 14, 19(1)(g), 21 and 300A of the Constitution of India and consequently direct the Respondents herein to permit the Petitioner to proceed with the development as per the approved building plan vide application dated 20.07.2013 in terms of GHMC Act, 1955 and lease agreement dated 08.02.2012 pursuant to letter of intent dated 22.08.2013 submitted in accordance with section 437 of the GHMC Act, 1955 in the extent of Ac.3.00 cents situated r in Sy.No.62/4 of Rushikonda village Visakhapatnam Rural Mandal, Visakhapatnam District. LA. NO: 1 OF 2013fWPMP. NO: 38384 OF 20131 Petition under Section 151 CPC is filed praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to direct the Respondents not to interfere, including demolition or disturb the possession and occupation of the Petitioner and the development activity undertaken by the Petitioner in terms of their application dated 20.07.2013 and in accordance with lease agreement dated 08.02.2012 in Ac.3.00 cents situated in Sy.No.62/4 of Rushikonda village! Visakhapatnam Rural Mandal, Visakhapatnam District. I.A. NO: 1 OF 2014fWVMP. NO: 352 OF 20141 Between: The Greater Visakhapatnam Municipal Corporation, Commissioner, GVMC Buildings, Asilmetta, Visakhapatnam. Rep. by its ...PETITIONER/RESPONDENT AND 1. The Government of A.P., Dept of Tourism and Culture and Youth Advancement, Rep. by its Secretary, Secretariat, Hyderabad. D' Block, 1st Floor, A.P. ...RESPONDENT/RESPONDENT 2. M/s. The City of Destiny Clubs & Resorts, A registered Partnership Firm, Having its Office at 18-1-70, 2nd Floor, Krishna Tej- S Plaza, K.G.H. Down Road, Visakhapatnam, Rep. by its Managing Partner, Sri: B.N. Murthy, Aged about 48 years, S/o.B.Venkateswara Rao. ...RESPONDENT/WRIT PETITIONER Petition under Section 151 CPC is filed praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to vacate the interim orders granted by this Hon'ble Court in W.P.M.P.No.38384/2013 in W.P.No.30912/2013, dt. 29.10.2013. Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI N ASHWANI KUMAR Counsel for the Respondent No.1: SRI A S C BOSE (SC FOR MUNICIPAL CORPORATIONS) Counsel for the Respondent No.2: GP FOR TOURISM The Court made the following: ORDER APHC010610202013 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3333] WEDNESDAY ,THE TWENTY SECOND DAY OF JANUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE V.SUJATHA WRIT PETITION NO: 30912/2013 Between: ...PETITIONER M/s. The City Of Destiny Clubs & Resorts, AND The Greater Visakhapatnam Municipal Corporation and ...RESPONDENT(S) Others Counsel for the Petitioner: 1.N ASHWANI KUMAR Counsel for the Respondent{S): 1 .A S C BOSE (SC FOR MUNICIPAL CORPORATIONS AP) The Court made the following: ORDER: The present Writ Petition came to be 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 a “Writ of Mandamus" declaring the action of f‘ Respondent Corporation in seeking to interfere with the possession and occupation and demolish the structures of the Petitioner to an extent of Ac. 3. 00 cents situated in Sy. No. 62/4 of Rushikonda village, Visakhapatnam Rural Mandal, Visakhapatnam District as illegal, arbitrary and violative of Articles 14, 19(1)(g), 21 and 300-A of the Constitution of India and consequently direct the Respondents herein to permit the Petitioner to proceed with the development as per the approved building plan vide application dated 20.07.2013 in terms of GHMC Act, 1955 and lease agreement dated 08.02.2012 pursuant to letter of intent dated 22.08.2013 submitted in accordance with section 437 of the GHMC Act, 1955 in the extent of Ac.3.00 cents situated in Sy.No.62/4 of Rushikonda village, Visakhapatnam Rural Mandal, Visakhapatnam District and pass... ” 2. The brief facts of the case are that the petitioner is a firm and in pursuance f G.O.Ms.No.6, dated 20.01.2010, issued by the respondent No.2 for promoting and developing tourism in Visakhapatnam, the respondent No.2 had leased out an extent of Ac.3.00 cents situated in Sy.No.62/4, Rushikonda Village, Visakhapatnam Rural Mandal, Visakhapatnam District to the petitioner-firm vide Lease Agreement dated 08.02.2012 for development of recreation and amusement park in the form of a beach resort. The said lease was granted to the petitioner-firm for a period of 33 years with a fixed lease amount of 5% of the market value during the first year of the lease period and thereafter, with an escalation of 5% per annum over the previous year’s lease amount and the market value of the project site is Rs.48,30,000/- and the lease amount payable by the petitioner-firm is Rs.7,25,000/-. 3. Thereafter, pursuant to the lease agreement dated 08.02.2012, the subject site was handed over to the petitioner byjbe respondent No.2 vide Delivery Receipt dated 27.04.2012 and further, the petitioner firm had also paid the necessary stamp duty and registration fee, which was acknowledged vide receipt dated 26.04.2012. 4. While so. the petitioner-firm after obtaining clearance from the respondent No.2, vide application dated 20.07.2013, had submitted the building plan for renovation of the existing structures to the respondent No.1 for approval. But as there is no response from the respondent No.1, the petitioner-firm after waiting for a period of 30 days, had deemed that the application dated 20.07.2013 has been approved by the respondent No.1 per section 437 of the GHMC Act, 1955, and proceeded with the renovation work on the existing structures that are handed over by the respondent No.2. The main grievance of the petitioner is that the respondent No.1 is trying to interfere with the possession and occupation of the petitioner firm and is trying to demolish the structures of the petitioner. Aggrieved by the action of the respondent No.1, the petitioner filed the present writ petition. When the matter came up for admission on 29.10.2013, this Court was pleased to grant the interim direction by directing the respondents not to interfere, including demolition or disturb the possession and occupation of the petitioner and the development activity undertaken by the petitioner in terms of their application dated 20.07.2013 and in accordance with the lease agreement dated 08.02.2012 in Ac.3.00 cents situated in Sy.No.62/4 of Rushikonda Village, Visakhapatnam Rural Mandal, Visakhapatnam District. Heard Sri N.Ashwani Kumar, learned counsel for the petitioner, Sri A.S.C.Bose, learned Standing Counsel appearing for the respondent No.1, learned Government Pleader for Tourism appearing for the respondent No.2, and perused the material available on record. 7. Today when the matter came up for hearing, learned Standing Counsel appearing for the respondent No.1 on oral instructions has submitted that in pursuance of the interim direction dated 29.10.201 S^ranted by this Court, the as 5. 6. w respondent-Municipal Corporation of Visakfiapatnam is not intending to « interfere with the possession and occupation of the petitioner and the ' development activity undertaken by the petitioner in terms of their application dated 20.07.2013 and in accordance with the lease agreement dated 08.02.2012 and if at all they intend to do so, they would follow the due process of law. In view of the oral instructions submitted by the learned Standing Counsel, instead of keeping the writ petition pending, this Court feels it appropriate to dispose of the writ petition by directing the respondent No.1- Municipal Corporation, Visakhaptnam, not to interfere, including demolition or disturb the possession and occupation of the petitioner and the development activity undertaken by the petitioner in terms of their application dated 20.07.2013 and in accordance with the lease agreement dated 08.02.2012 in Ac.3.00 cents situated in Sy.No.62/4 of Rushikonda Village, Visakhapatnam Rural Mandal, Visakhapatnam District without following due process of law. 7. 8. With the above direction, the Writ Petition is disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs. Miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, in this Writ Petition shall stand closed. Sd/- K. TATA RAO DEPUTY REGISTRAR //TRUE COPY// SECTION OFFICER To, 1. The Commissioner, Greater Visakhapatnam Municipal Corporation, GVMC Buildings, Asilmetta, Visakhapatnam. 2. The Secretary, Dept of Tourism and Culture and Youth Advancement, Secretariat, Velagapudi, Amarvathi, Guntur District. 3. One CC to Sri N Ashwani Kumar Advocate [OPUC] 4. One CC to Sri A S C Bose (SC for Municipal Corporations) Advocate [OPUC] 5. Two CCs to GP for Tourism, High Court of Andhra Pradesh.[OUT] 6. Three CD Copies TF HIGH COURT DATED:22/01/2025 ORDER WP.No.30912of 2013 DISPOSING OF THE W.P., WITHOUT COSTS