-1- W.P. No.32302 OF 2025 Date of order:20.11.2025 APHC010622202025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3457] THURSDAY, THE TWENTIETH DAY OF NOVEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE HARINATH.N WRIT PETITION NO: 32302/2025 Between: Potluri Chandra Sekhar, ...PETITIONER AND The State Of Andhra Pradesh and Others ...RESPONDENT(S) Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. Sri P VIJAYA KIRAN Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. Ld. GP FOR MUNCIPAL ADMN URBAN DEV 2. Sri A.S.C. Bose, Ld. Standing Counsel for R.2. The Court made the following: -2- W.P. No.32302 OF 2025 Date of order:20.11.2025 THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE HARINATH.N WRIT PETITION No.32302 OF 2025 ORDER: 1. The petitioner is aggrieved by the action of the 2nd respondent in issuing notice under Section 146 of the Andhra Pradesh Municipal Corporation Act, 1955 [hereinafter referred to as ‘the A.P.M.C. Act, 1955’], dt.22.08.2025. 2. The petitioner was informed by the 2nd respondent that the land an extent of 88 square yards, belonging to the petitioner, is required for the proposed road widening from NTR Stadium Junction to CH. Hanumaiah Statue Junction in Guntur. The said notice calls upon the petitioner to cooperate with the 2nd respondent and give due consent for handing over the site to enable the latter to proceed with the road widening activity. The notice also states that the petitioner, subject to eligibility for land compensation, shall be issued TDRs in terms of G.O. Ms. No.119, MA & UD, dt.28.03.2017. 3. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the 2nd respondent has unilaterally decided to take over the land of the petitioner without calling for any response from the petitioner. 4. The learned standing counsel appearing for the 2nd respondent submits that, in spite of the petitioner having submitted her response to the notice under Section 146 of the A.P.M.C. Act, 1955, she has filed the -3- W.P. No.32302 OF 2025 Date of order:20.11.2025 present writ petition and approached this Court. It is also submitted that the respondents shall consider the reply of the petitioner and take necessary steps. 5. Heard the submissions of the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned standing counsel for the 2nd respondent. 6. The impugned proceedings dt.22.08.2025 indicates that the 2nd respondent has decided to take over the land of the petitioner and has called upon the petitioner to cooperate with the said process. It is also stated that, subject to eligibility, the petitioner shall be compensated by issuance of a TDR certificate. 7. Section 146 of the A.P.M.C. Act, 1955 deals with the acquisition of immovable property by agreement. In such circumstances, the impugned notice is liable to be set aside as the 2nd respondent has not left any scope for agreement between the petitioner and the 2nd respondent. Ideally, the petitioner ought to have been called for negotiations and acceptable terms of compensation proposed by the 2nd respondent. In the absence of such averments in the notice, the impugned notice cannot be sustained and is liable to be set aside. 8. Accordingly, the impugned notice is set aside, making it clear that the 2nd respondent shall follow the due process of law by issuing notice and by complying with the provisions of the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013 or by proposing any other acceptable proposal to the petitioner. -4- W.P. No.32302 OF 2025 Date of order:20.11.2025 9. With these observations, the writ petition stands disposed of. 10. Miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending in this writ petition shall stand closed. ____________________ JUSTICE HARINATH.N BV