1 HN, J W.P.No.28558_2025 APHC010551612025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3457] THURSDAY,THE TWENTY SEVENTH DAY OF NOVEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE HARINATH.N WRIT PETITION NO: 28558/2025 Between: 1. BOYA LAKSHMI, W/O. LATE PRAHALAD, AGED ABOUT 80 YEARS, H.NO. 1-892, TANK BUND ROAD, INDIRA NAGAR, YEMMIGANUR, KURNOOL DISTRICT. ...PETITIONER AND 1. THE STATE OF AP, MUNICIPAL ADMINISTRATION AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT, AMARAVATHI, REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY. 2. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR AND DISTRICT MAGISTRATE, KURNOOL, KURNOOL DISTRICT. 3. THE YEMMIGANUR MUNICIPALITY, YEMMIGANUR, KURNOOL DISTRICT, REP. BY ITS COMMISSIONER. 4. GATTU ALTHAF, , S/O. GATTU KHAJA PATEL KATIKE STREET, 0PP. SULTHAN MASJID, YEMMIGANUR, KURNOOL DISTRICT. ...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 or direction more particularly one in the nature of WRIT OF MANDAMUS, declaring the action of the 3rd respondent in not taking action against the highhanded action of the 4th respondent who is erecting 5 tin shed shops on road margin, opposite to the petitioner's house bearing D.No. 1-892, Tank Bund Road, Indira Nagar, 2 HN, J W.P.No.28558_2025 Yemmiganur, Kurnool District unauthorlsedly, and illegally, as illegal, arbitrary, unjust and violative of Article 14 of the Constitution of India and consequently DIRECT the respondents No. 1 to 3 to remove 5 tin shed shops sought to be erected by the 4th respondent unauthorisely and illegally on road margin, opposite to the petitioner's house bearing D.No. 1-892, Tank Bund Road, Indira Nagar, Yemmiganur, Kurnool District 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 3rd respondent not to allow the 4th respondent to erect 5 tin shed shops on road margin, opposite to the petitioner's house bearing D.No. 1-892, Tank Bund Road, Indira Nagar, Yemmiganur, Kurnool District, pending disposal of above writ petition and pass Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. BUTTA VIJAYA BHASKER Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. Gudapati Lakshminarayana SC For Municipalities in Rayalaseema Region 2. N RANGA REDDY 3. GP MUNCIPAL ADMN AND URBAN DEV AP 3 HN, J W.P.No.28558_2025 ORDER: 1. The petitioner has filed the present writ petition alleging inaction on the part of respondent No.3 against the high-handed action of respondent No.4 in erecting five tin-shed shops on the road margin abutting the petitioner’s property in an unauthorized manner, and seeks a direction for their removal. 2. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the petitioner, aged about 80 years, submitted a representation on 06.10.2025 to respondent No.2 seeking indulgence for the removal of the unauthorized construction of tin sheds by respondent No.4 and others. It is submitted that the petitioner was issued a patta for the said property on 12.03.1996 and has been residing there ever since, after constructing a room on it. The construction of tin sheds abutting the petitioner’s property has obstructed the ingress and egress to the patta land, and therefore the petitioner seeks a direction to respondent No.3 to remove the said construction. 3. Sri A.S.C.Bose, learned Standing counsel appearing for respondent No.3, submits that certain individuals who were displaced due to road widening were given alternative sites belonging to the municipality, and that road margin abutting the petitioner’s property was identified by respondent No.3 for allotment to respondent No.4 and others for conducting their business. The said land was a vacant piece of municipal land found suitable for such allotment. The learned Standing counsel for respondent No.3 has also filed a counter affidavit stating that the allotment of the said vacant land in the layout to respondent No.4 and others cannot be objected 4 HN, J W.P.No.28558_2025 to by the petitioner, as the petitioner has an alternate northern access to her property. The learned Standing counsel has also placed on record the layout plan, which indicates a road on the northern side of the petitioner’s property. It is further stated that the petitioner was merely enjoying the vacant municipal land all these years, and when respondent No.3 allotted the same to third parties, the present writ petition was filed. It is submitted that allotment of alternative land to respondent No.4 and others is in pursuance of the rehabilitation extended by the respondent No.3 to those who lost their property in the road-widening process. 4. Considering the submissions of the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and the learned Standing counsel appearing for respondent No.3, and upon perusal of the counter, it is clear that the petitioner has an alternative access to the road, and the land adjoining the petitioner’s property belongs to respondent No.3. The temporary allotment of this land to respondent No.4 and others for their livelihood cannot be the subject of interference in a writ petition. This Court cannot interfere, by exercising the jurisdiction. 5. Accordingly the present writ petition is dismissed. There shall be no order as to costs. Pending miscellaneous petitions, if any, shall stand closed. ___________________ JUSTICE HARINATH.N Date:27.11.2025 NKA 5 HN, J W.P.No.28558_2025 223 THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE HARINATH.N WRIT PETITION NO: 28558 of 2025 Date: 27.11.2025 NKA