APHC010677712025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3457] TUESDAY,THE TWENTY THIRD DAY OF DECEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE HARINATH.N WRIT PETITION NO: 35800/2025 Between: 1. MEKALA SHAIK KHAJA BASHA, S/O. M. SHAIK ANSAR BASHA, AGED ABOUT 46 YEARS, R/O. D.NO. 12/203-B-1. MANCHALA RAMAIAH STREET, KADAPA, YSR KADAPA DISTRICT - 516001. ...PETITIONER AND 1. THE STATE OF AP, REP BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY,MUNICIPAL ADMINISTRATION AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT,SECRETARIAT, VELAGAPUDI, AMARAVATHI, GUNTUR DIST. 522503 2. THE COMMISSIONER AND DIRECTOR MUNICIPAL ADMINISTRATION, GOVERNMENT OF ANDHRA PRADESH, AMARAVATHI, GUNTUR DIST. 522241 3. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, YSR KADAPA DISTRICT 516004 4. THE KADAPA MUNICIPAL CORPORATION, , KADAPA, YSR KADAPA DISTRICT, REP. BY ITS COMMISSIONER. 516001 5. SHAIK MOHAMMED JEELAN, S/O. SHAIK MAHABOOB BASHA, R/O. D.NO. 12/169, MANCHALA RAMAIAH STREET, KADAPA, YSR KADAPA DISTRICT- 516001. 2 ...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 an appropriate Writ, Order or Direction, more particularly one in the nature of a Writ of Mandamus, declaring the inaction of the respondents in failing to take action pursuant to the endorsement dated 12.09.2025 as arbitrary, illegal, and violative of the provisions of the Andhra Pradesh Municipal Corporations Act, 1955, and the fundamental rights guaranteed under Articles 14, 19, and 21 of the Constitution of India, and consequently direct the respondents to take immediate and appropriate action against the illegal and unauthorized construction carried out by the 5th respondent at Door No. 12/169, Manchala Ramaiah Street, Kadapa, in violation of the sanctioned plan and building permission vide B.A. No. 1013/0590/B/KAD/AEP/2025 and to Remove the unauthorized additional floors, deviations, and encroachments made by the 5th respondent upon the public rasta/common passage and ensure restoration of the same to its original extent, enabling free access to all residents 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 and, pending final disposal of this writ petition, pass an interim order restraining the respondents and, in particular, respondent No. 5 from carrying out any further construction, raising additional floors, to the building situated at Door No. 12/169, Manchala Ramaiah Street Kadapa, and from committing any further encroachment upon the public rasta/common passage, and ultimately pass Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. MUJTAHID HUSSAIN Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. POTHAM VENGALA REDDY SC For M.Corporation in Rayalaseema region In 2. GP FOR MUNCIPAL ADMN URBAN DEV 3 3. GP FOR REVENUE The Court made the following: 4 ORDER: The petitioner is aggrieved by unauthorized construction undertaken by the 5th respondent. 2. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that although the 5th respondent obtained permission for construction of G+1 floor vide Building Permit Order dated 03.09.2025, the 5th respondent is alleged to have encroached upon a public road and has also raised an additional floor over and above the permitted construction. In this regard, the petitioner has submitted a representation dated 19.05.2025, followed by another representation dated 08.09.2025. 3. It is submitted that though the petitioner has submitted representations and also issued legal notices to the concerned, there is no response from the 4th respondent. 4. Sri P. Vengala Reddy, the learned Standing Counsel appearing for the 4th respondent, on receipt of the written instructions dated 15.12.2025, submits that the respondent-authority has conducted a field visit and determined that the 5th respondent has not encroached upon any public road. The allegation pertaining to the unauthorized construction is concerned, the 5th respondent has submitted a reply to the 4th respondent stating that he intends to regularize the deviations and intends to apply for the additional floor under the Building Penalization Scheme (BPS). 5 5. It is also stated that the 5th respondent has submitted an application under BPS Scheme for regularization of the deviation. 6. It is also stated in the said written instructions that the 4th respondent shall consider the application of the 5th respondent, strictly in accordance with the terms and conditions of the G.O.Ms.No.225, dated 12.11.2025 7. It is further stated that the petitioner did not attend the joint survey, despite efforts made to contact him intimating that the deviations could not be rectified. 8. Considering the submissions of the learned counsel for the petitioner and the leaned Standing Counsel for the 4th respondent, this Writ Petition is disposed of at the admission stage, making it clear to the 4th respondent to pass appropriate orders in so far as the application of the 5th respondent is concerned, strictly in terms of the G.O.Ms.No.225, dated 12.11.2025. There shall be no order as to costs. As a sequel, miscellaneous applications pending, if any, shall also stand closed. ___________________ JUSTICE HARINATH.N SCH 6 210 HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE HARINATH.N Writ Petition No.35800 of 2025 Date: 23.12.2025 SCH