APHC010629292025 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: 32471/2025 Between: 1. M SAILAKSHMI, W/O LATE SEETARAMAIAH, NOW AGED ABOUT 52 YEARS, OCC HOUSEWIFE, R/O FLAT NO.301, H.NO.7-8-1, ANJANADRI APARTMENT RAMARAO PETA, KAKINADA, EAST GODAVARI DISTRICT. 2. CH.VENKATA CHALAPATI RAO,, 5/O KONDAYYA SASTRI, AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS, R/O FLAT NO.303, H.NO.7-8-1, ANJANADRI APARTMENT, RAMARAO PETA, KAKINADA, EAST GODAVARI DISTRICT. ...PETITIONER(S) AND 1. THE STATE OF AP, REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, MUNICIPAL ADMINISTRATION DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT, AMARAVATHI, GUNTUR DISTRICT, A.P. 2. THE KAKINADA MUNICIPAL CORPORATION, REP BY ITS COMMISSIONER, KAKINADA 3. THE REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER/ SUB DIVISIONAL MAGISTRATE, KAKINADA . ...RESPONDENT(S): Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased topleased to issue Writ Order or Direction more particularly one in the nature of WRIT OF MANDAMUS, to declare the proceedings of the 2nd Respondent dt. 15-11-2025 vide Roc.No. 3675/2021,02, directing the petitioners herein to vacate and demolish their individual flats bearing No. 301 and 303 respectively in ANJANADRI APARTMENTS immediately, as contrary to the principles of natural justice and as well as contrary to the provisions of the Municipal Corporation Act, consequently, direct the 2nd respondent not to interfere nor to demolish the petitioners individual flats in Anjanadri Apartments, and pass IA NO: 1 OF 2025 Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased pleased to direct the 2nd respondent not to interfere nor to demolish the petitioners residential flats bearing No. 301 and 303 respectively in Anjanadri Apartments, pursuant to the proceedings dt.15-11-2025 vide Roc.No.3675/2021, G2, pending disposal of the above writ petition and pass Counsel for the Petitioner(S): 1. B CHANDRA SHEKHAR Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. GP MUNCIPAL ADMN AND URBAN DEV AP The Court made the following: THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE HARINATH.N WRIT PETITION No.32471 OF 2025 ORDER: The petitioners are aggrieved by the impugned proceedings dated 15.11.2025 whereby the 2nd respondent called upon the petitioners to vacate and handover the possession of the building to the 2nd respondent for dismantling the structure as the building of the petitioners is in dilapidated condition. 2. The learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the 2nd respondent based on the structural soundness report issued by the JNTU, Kakinada called upon the petitioners to comply with the recommendations of the expert team which had conducted the structural stability test. It is submitted that the petitioners have also completed the relevant repairs in terms of the recommendations received and submitted to the 2nd respondent. It is also submitted that the building was constructed in the year 2002 and as such the same cannot be considered as fit for demolition. 3. The learned standing counsel for the 2nd respondent on the contrary submits that out of 16 flat owners, 14 flat owners are vacated and that the petitioners are refusing to vacate the same and comply with the notice dated 15.11.2025. 4. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned standing counsel for the 2nd respondent. Perused the material on record. 5. Considering the submissions of the learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned standing counsel for the 2nd respondent, this Court deems it appropriate to dispose of the writ petition at the admission stage directing the 2nd respondent to depute its Executive Engineer to visit the building and give a detailed report on the repairs that would be required to be carried out by the apartment association and give adequate time for complying with the recommendations/observations of the Executive Engineer. This direction is given to the 2nd respondent keeping in view that the building was constructed in the year 2002. Needless to mention that the petitioners shall have to comply with the structural repairs as suggested by the Executive Engineer. The impugned proceedings are hereby suspended. 6. Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed off without costs. As a sequel, miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shall stand closed. ___________________ JUSTICE HARINATH.N Issue CC by 21.11.2025 B/o.KGM THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE HARINATH.N WRIT PETITION No.32471 OF 2025 Dated 20.11.2025 CC by 21.11.2025 KGM