APHC010721022014 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: 31661/2014 Between: Vankina Chamudeswaranath, ...PETITIONER AND The Government Of Andhra Pradesh and Others ...RESPONDENT(S) Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. P HEMACHANDRA Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. V SURYA KIRAN KUMAR (SC FOR VMRDA and MUDA) 2. GP-MUNCIPAL ADMN AND URBAN DEV(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 an appropriate writ, order or direction, more particularly a Writ in the nature of Mandamus, declaring the action of the respondents in trying to dispossess me from my land in an extent of 3337 sq. yards or 2790.155 sq.mtrs, covered in patta No.5, survey No.11, situated at Hazisahebpet, Vizianagaram Municipality, without notice and without following the due process of law, in spite of the petitioner is having registered sale deed dated 17.9.2005 bearing No.7801/2005 and patta bearing No.5, as being illegal, arbitrary and as being violative of principles of natural justice and fair play violative to the provisions of Article 14, 16, 19 and 300-A of the Constitution of India as well as the powers granted to the 2nd and 3rd respondents under Visakhapatnam Urban Development Authority Act and rules made thereunder and consequently direct the respondents 1 to 3 not to dispossess the petitioner from his land in an extent of 3337 sq.yards or 2790.155 sq.mtrs covered in patta No.5, survey No.11, situated at Hazisahebpet, Vizianagaram Municipality without following the due process of law and pass…” 2. The brief facts of the case are that the petitioner is the owner and possessor of the site in an extent of 3337 Sq.yards covered under patta No.5, survey No.11, situated at Hazisahebpet, Vizianagaram Mandal, Viziangaraam District which was purchased under registered sale deed bearing No.7801/2005 dated 17.09.2005 executed by one Sri Datla Venkata Varaha Appala Narasimharaju, S/o. late Datla Jogi Jagannadha Ramachandra Raju. 3. While so, in the month of May, 2013, the respondent authorities visited the petitioners plot and directed the petitioner to vacate the premises. Thereafter, the petitioner issued legal notices dated 03.04.2013 and 09.06.2013 to the respondent Nos.2 and 3 informing that the subject land was purchased under sale deed dated 17.09.2005 and requested them not to interfere with the peaceful possession and enjoyment of the petitioner. 4. The main grievance of the petitioner is that, upon the request of the petitioner, one Sri Kuncha Partha Sarathi visitied the petitioner’s site in the month of September, 2014 and found that the respondent No.4 herein is making arrangements for sale of house-site plots in the survey Nos.11, 20/1, situated at Hazisahebpet Village, Vizianagaam Mandal and District by virtue of the layout permission vide L.P.No.35 of 2009, issued by the respondent Nos.2 and 3. On coming to know the same, the petitioner has brought to the notice of the respondent Nos.2 and 3 that the layout approval under LP No.35 of 2009 is covering the petitioner’s site and the land in Survey No.11 does not belong to the respondent No.4. But, no action was taken by the respondent Nos.2 and 3 in cancelling the layout approval granted to the respondent No.4 herein. Thereafter, on 15.10.2014, under the influence of the respondent No.4, the officers and subordinate staff of the respondent Nos.2 & 3, visited the petitioner’s site and directed the petitioner to vacate from the subject property. Aggrieved by the action of the official respondents, the petitioner filed the present writ petition. 5. Heard Sri N.Manikanta, learned counsel representing Sri P.Hemachandra, learned counsel for the petitioner, learned Government Pleader for Municipal Administration and Urban Development appearing for the respondent No.1, Sri V.Surya Kiran Kumar, learned Standing Counsel appearing for the respondent Nos.2 & 3 and perused the material available on record. 6. Today when the matter came up for hearing, learned Standing Counsel appearing for the respondent No.3 has furnished a copy of instructions dated 21.01.2025, wherein it is stated that the VMRDA erstwhile VUDA has approved the layout in L.P.No.35/2009 to an extent of Acs.11.53 Cts. covered in Sy.No.11/p & 20/1p of Hajisahabpeta Village, Vizianagaram Taluk, Vizianagaram District, in favour of M/s Indur Developers & Agencies Pvt. Ltd., but not in favour of M/s. Kapil Homes/respondent No.4 herein. It is further stated that the said layouts were approved by the concerned authority around 16 years ago i.e., in the year 2009 and further the authority would not dispossess any person from the lands particularly the land in an extent of 3337 Sq.yards covered under patta No.5, survey No.11, situated at Hazisahebpet, Vizianagaram Mandal, Viziangaraam District. 7. On a perusal of the instructions submitted by the learned Standing Counsel, it can be seen that the VUDA has approved the layout in L.P.No.35/2009 in favor of M/s Indur Developers & Agencies Pvt. Ltd., but not in favour of M/s. Kapil Homes/respondent No.4 herein and further the authority concerned would not dispossess the petitioner from the land in an extent of 3337 Sq.yards covered under Patta No.5, survey No.11, situated at Hazisahebpet, Vizianagaram Mandal, Viziangaraam District without following due process of law. 8. In view of the same, as the respondent authorities are intending to dispossess the petitioner from his site, instead of keeping the writ petition pending, this Court feels it appropriate to dispose of the writ petition by directing the respondent Nos.2 & 3 to not to dispossess the petitioner from the land in an extent of 3337 Sq.yards covered under patta No.5, survey No.11, situated at Hazisahebpet, Vizianagaram Mandal, Viziangaraam District, without following due process of law. 9. 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. ___________________ JUSTICE V.SUJATHA Date: 22.01.2025 SRT 336 THE HONOURABLE SMT.JUSTICE V.SUJATHA W.P.No.31661 of 2014 Date: 22.01.2025 SRT