APHC010532192025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3457] THURSDAY,THE THIRTIETH DAY OF OCTOBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE HARINATH.N WRIT PETITION NO: 27628/2025 Between: P N Suresh Reddy ...PETITIONER AND The State Of Ap and Others ...RESPONDENT(S) Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. P V VENKATA RAVI SANKAR and Dr. P.B Reddy Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. VENKATA RAMA RAO KOTA SC FOR APSPDCL 2. GP MUNCIPAL ADMN AND URBAN DEV AP The Court made the following: -2- W.P. No.27628 OF 2025 Date of order: 30.10.2025 THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE HARINATH.N WRIT PETITION No.27628 OF 2025 ORDER: 1. This writ petition has been filed challenging the inaction of the respondents 1 to 5 in not considering the representation of the petitioner dated 25.09.2025, wherein the petitioner sought action against respondents 6 and 7 for attempting to construct a house without any lawful right, title, or interest over the property bearing Plot No.19 in Survey No. 310-2 of Sreekantapuram Village, Hindupur Municipality and Mandal, Sri Satya Sai District. 2. The petitioner has attempted to serve notice on respondents 6 and 7. However, the notices are returned with an endorsement ‘absent and left without instructions’. 3. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has filed O.S. No.257 of 2025 on the file of the Court of the Junior Civil Judge, Hindupur, and that the Court is non functional as on date, as such the suit could not be proceeded further. It is submitted that the petitioner has purchased the property vide registered sale deed dated 12.07.2018 and has been in possession and enjoyment. It is submitted that respondents 6 and 7 have dug up the site of the petitioner and also seem to have obtained electricity connection for carryout out the construction. -3- W.P. No.27628 OF 2025 Date of order: 30.10.2025 4. The learned standing appearing for the 2nd respondent, on written instructions, submits that the unofficial respondents have also filed O.S. No.103 of 2019 claiming the right over the same property. It is also submitted that the permission was sanctioned to respondents 6 and 7 on the strength of the documents submitted. It is also stated that the dispute between the petitioner and the unofficial respondents is civil in nature. 5. On the contrary, the learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has submitted a representation to the 3rd respondent seeking to cancel the permission if any granted to the unofficial respondents, which is yet to be considered by the respondent authorities. 6. The 5th respondent has filed counter duly intimating that the petitioner made a representation requesting not to sanction electricity connection in favour of respondents 6 and 7. It is also stated that the electricity connection was sanctioned by following the due procedure and after going through the relevant document as submitted by respondents 6 and 7. 7. Considering these submissions, the writ petition is disposed of directing the 3rd respondent to conduct an enquiry by issuing notice to respondents 6 and 7 as well as to the petitioner and pass appropriate orders on the representation of the petitioner dated -4- W.P. No.27628 OF 2025 Date of order: 30.10.2025 25.09.2025. Pending such consideration, the respondents shall maintain status quo. 8. With the above, the writ petition is disposed of. No costs. ___________________ JUSTICE HARINATH.N BV