APHC010787032016 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3310] THURSDAY ,THE THIRTIETH DAY OF JANUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE K MANMADHA RAO WRIT PETITION NO: 21572/2016 Between: G Satyaparasad ...PETITIONER AND State Of Ap Prl Scy Endowments Hyd 5 and Others ...RESPONDENT(S) Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. SURESH KUMAR POTTURI Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. GP FOR HOME (AP) 2. GP FOR REVENUE (AP) 3. G JHANSI 4. GP FOR ENDOWMENTS (AP) The Court made the following: ORDER: This writ petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking the following relief:- “..to issue a writ Order or orders more particularly in the nature of the Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the Respondents in trying to demolish the building of the Petitioner situated in 10-19-2, Brahman Street, Radham Centre, I town, Canal Road, Vijayawada Urban, Vijayawada, Krishna without issuing any notice or following any law as illegal, arbitrary and violation of Articles 14, 21 and 300-A of the Constitution of India and consequently direct the respondents not to demolish the building of the Petitioner situated at H.No.10-19- 2, Brahman Street, Radham Centre, I town, Canal Road, Vijayawada Urban Vijayawada Krishna without following due process of the law....” 2. On 01.07.2016, this Court while issuing ‘Notice before admission’, has granted an interim direction directing the respondents not to demolish the building of the Petitioner situated at H.No.10-19-2, Brahman Street, Radham Centre, I town, Canal Road, Vijayawada Urban, Vijayawada, Krishna without following due process of the law for a period of four (4) weeks. Thereafter, on 11.06.2016, the said interim order is extended until further orders. 3. Heard Mr Madala Sai Teja, learned counsel representing on behalf of Mr Suresh Kumar Potturi, learned counsel for the petitioner, learned Government Pleader for Endowments and Smt Padmavathi Padnavis, learned Standing Counsel appearing for the respondents. 4. During hearing, learned counsel for the petitioner reiterated the averments made in the Writ Petition. Whereas, the learned Government Pleader for Endowments appearing for the respondents submits that the respondents are not demolishing the building of the petitioner and with a mere apprehension only, the petitioner has filed the present Writ Petition. Hence, the learned Government Pleader requests to dismiss the Writ Petition. 5 Considering the submissions of learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Government Pleader, if the respondents intend to demolish the subject building of the petitioner they are directed to follow the due process of law. Till then, the respondents are directed not to take any coercive steps against the petitioner with regard to the subject property. 6. With the above directions, this Writ Petition is disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs. As a sequel, miscellaneous applications pending, if any, shall stand closed. _________________________ DR. K. MANMADHA RAO, J. Date: 30.01.2025 TM