APHC010629032025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3332] TUESDAY, THE SIXTEENTH DAY OF DECEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE RAVI CHEEMALAPATI WRIT PETITION NO: 32658/2025 Between: 1. SHAIK MOHAMMAD JILANI BASHA,, S/O KALESHAVALI, MUSLIM, AGED ABOUT 31 YEARS, R/O DR. NO. 2-23, BESIDES RICE MILL, BEHIND RAJAGOPALA SWAMY TEMPLE, NEAR BUS STAND, KOTHAPATNAM VILLAGE, POST AND MANDAL, PRAKASAM DISTRICT, ANDHRA PRADESH. ...PETITIONER AND 1. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, PANCHAYAT RAJ AND RURAL DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT BUILDINGS, AMARAVATI. 2. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, PRAKASAM DISTRICT, ANDHRA PRADESH. 3. THE DISTRICT PANCHAYAT OFFICER, PRAKASAM DISTRICT, ANDHRA PRADESH. 4. THE MANDAL PARISHAD DEVELOPMENT OFFICER, KOTHAPATNAM MANDAL, PRAKASAM DISTRICT. 2 5. THE KOTHAPATNAM GRAM PANCHAYAT, REP. BY ITS PANCHAYAT SECRETARY, KOTHAPATNAM MANDAL, PRAKASAM DISTRICT. 6. THE TAHSILDAR, KOTHAPATNAM MANDAL, PRAKASAM DISTRICT. 7. SHAIK MUMTAJ BEGUM, W/O CHINNA MASTHAN, AGED ABOUT 75 YEARS, R/O DR. NO. 2-13(A), BESIDES HIGH SCHOOL, KOTHAPATNAM VILLAGE POST PRAKASAM DISTRICT, ANDHRA PRADESH. 8. CHINNA MASTHAN, S/O NANNE SAHEB, AGED ABOUT 75 YEARS, R/O DR. NO. 2-13(A), BESIDES HIGH SCHOOL, KOTHAPATNAM VILLAGE POST PRAKASAM DISTRICT, ANDHRA PRADESH. ...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 a Writ, order, direction, more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the Respondent Nos. 2 to 6 in not taking any action pursuant to the representations of the Petitioner pertaining to illegal and unauthorized construction being carried out by Respondent Nos. 7 and 8 on Petitioners land in Sy. No. 1411 of Kothapatnam Village and Mandal, Prakasam District, admeasuring to an extent of Ac. 0.28 72 cents as illegal, arbitrary, unconstitutional and violative to provisions of Andhra Pradesh Panchayat Raj Act, 1994 and Andhra Pradesh Gram Panchayat Land Development (Layout and Building) Rules, 2002 and Article 19, 21 and 300-A of Indian Constitution and consequently, direct the Respondent Nos. 2 to 6 take appropriate action against the illegal construction carried out by Respondent Nos. 7 and 8 and demolish the illegal and unauthorized construction in an extent of Ac. 0.28 14 centsin Sy. 3 No. 1411 of Kothapatnam Village and Mandal, Prakasam Districtand 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 Respondents to forthwith stop the illegal construction of Respondent Nos. 7 and 8 in an extent of Ac. 0.28 14 centsin Sy. No. 1411 of Kothapatnam Village and Mandal, Prakasam Districtand pass Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. SINGAMSETTY V.M. SANKAR Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. GP FOR PANCHAYAT RAJ RURAL DEV 2. GP FOR REVENUE 3. CHALLA HRUDAY RAJ 4. Mattegunta.Sudhir,Standing Counsel For Z.P.Ps,M.P.Ps,Gram Panchayats The Court made the following Order: Challenging the action of respondent Nos.2 to 6 in not taking any action against the illegal and unauthorized construction being carried out by unofficial respondent Nos.7 & 8 on the petitioner’s land to an extent of Ac.0.28½ cents situated in Sy.No.1411 of Kothapatnam Village and Mandal, Prakasam 4 District, despite representations dated 01.08.2025 & 25.08.2025, the present writ petition is filed. 2. Heard Sri S.V. Maruthi Sankar, learned counsel for the petitioner, Sri M. Sudheer, learned Standing Counsel for the Gram Panchayat and Ms. Naga Chandrika, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner, in elaboration to what has been stated in the affidavit, submitted that the petitioner is the absolute owner and possessor of the subject land, having acquired the same through valid registered sale deed vide document No.9189 of 2007, dated 09.10.2007. The unofficial respondent Nos.7 & 8 highhandedly, without any manner of right and without obtaining any building permission from the concerned Gram Panchayat, are proceeding with the construction. Despite bringing it to the notice of the respondent authorities by way of representations dated 01.08.2025 & 25.08.2025, no action has been initiated, though a statutory duty is cast upon the Gram Panchayat by virtue of section 121 read with G.O.Ms.No.67, dated 28.02.2002. 5 He further submitted that it would suffice for the time being if a direction is given to the respondent authorities concerned to take steps against the unauthorized construction being carried out by respondent Nos.7 & 8 in accordance with law. It is stated that a notice has been sent to the unofficial respondents and the same was delivered on them and proof of evidence, postal tract report, has been filed along with memo. 4. On the other hand, learned Standing Counsel submitted that it is the dispute between the petitioner and unofficial respondent Nos.7 & 8 with regard to the subject land. If at all they have any grievance with regard to title, they have to approach the competent civil Court and the Gram Pachayat has no right to interfere in or settle such dispute. In so far as the construction is concerned, unofficial respondent Nos.7 & 8 did not obtain permission from the Gram Panchayat. He further submitted that the Gram Panchayat has an intention to take steps against the unauthorized construction, if any carried out by respondent Nos.7 & 8 in accordance with law. As such, prayed to dismiss the writ petition. 6 5. Perused the record and considered the submissions of respective parties. 6. This Court is not inclined to adjudicate as to who is the rightful owner of the subject land whether it is the petitioner or respondent Nos.7 & 8. If at all petitioner has any grievance over the subject land he has to approach the competent civil Court for their rights. Insofar as the construction of building is concerned, by virtue of section 121 of AP Panchayat Raj Act, 1994, no individual shall construct any building whether obtaining permission from the Gram Panchayat concerned and if any individual makes any construction without any permission as required, it is the duty cast upon the Gram Panchayt and the District Panchayat Officer (DPO) concerned to take steps as per law. 7. As the relief sought is innocuous, this Court is inclined to dispose of the writ petition without inviting any counter affidavit. As no positive orders are being passed, hearing to unofficial respondent Nos.7 & 8 is hereby dispensed with. As such, this Court is inclined to dispose of the writ petition by passing the following order: 7 “The respondent Gram Panchayat shall look into the grievance of the petitioner so made in the representations dated 01.08.2025 & 25.08.2025 and, if it is found that respondent Nos.7 & 8 are proceeding with the construction without approved building plan, shall take steps in accordance with law by issuing proper notices to the concerned parties, inviting explanation giving sufficient time and to pass a reasoned order after providing an opportunity of being heard and the same shall be informed to the petitioner in writing. The said exercise shall be completed within a period of three (03) months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.” 8. Accordingly, the Writ Petition is disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs. As a sequel thereto, interlocutory applications pending, if any in the Writ Petition, shall also stand closed. ____________________________ JUSTICE RAVI CHEEMALAPATI Date: 16.12.2025 ANS 8 235 THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE RAVI CHEEMALAPATI WRIT PETITION NO: 32658/2025 Date: 16.12.2025 ANS