IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH :: (Special Original Jurisdiction) THURSDAY, THE THIRD DAY OF APRIL TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE NYAPATHY VIJAY WRIT PETITION NO: 8724 OF 7n9R AMARAVAJ^ jVA. X'/ o % O i '* ‘X X Between: - Dudekula Saleema, W/o Shaik lliaz Basha, Aged 46 years, Resident of Door No.20-196, Survey No.279, Pirzathipet, Venkatagiri Municipality (Town) Tirupati District, Andhra Pradesh. ...PETITIONER AND 1. The State of Andhra Pradesh, Rep by its Principle Secretary, Municipal Administration and Urban Development Department, A.P. Secretariat, Velagapudi, Guntur. 2. The Venkatagiri Municipality, Venkatagiri, Tirupati District, Rep by Commissioner. its ...RESPONDENTS 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 to issue an appropriate Writ, Order or direction more particularly in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the arbitrary action of / one the respondents more particularly respondent No.2 in issuing final orders vide RoC.No.203/2024-G1 dated 23.03.2025 for removal of the petitioners private property an extent of 70 Sq. Feet in Street No.30 of Survey No.279 Jetipalem, Venkatagiri Municipality (Town) Tirupati District by ignoring the registered documents, possession and without considering the explanation dated 29.03.2025 further intends to demolish the same, which is highly Illegal, arbitrary and violation of Article 14, 21 and 300A of the Constitution V of India and consequently direct the 2 peacefuly possession and enjoyment of the petitioner. nd respondent not to interfere with lA 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 pleased to suspend the final orders vide RoC.No.203/2024-G1 23.03.2025 issued by the 2'"'^ respondent for removal of petitioners private property without passing any orders to the objections raised by the petitioner, pending disposal of the above writ petition. Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI ELURU SESHA MAHESH BABU Counsel for the Respondent No.1: GP FOR MUNICIPAL ADMINISTRATION AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT Counsel for the Respondent No.2: SRI GUDAPATI LAKSHMI may be dated NARAYANA, SC FOR MUNICIPALITIES The Court made the following: ORDER 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH at AMARAVATl (Special Original Jurisdiction) THURSDAY ,THE THIRD DAY OF APRIL TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE NYAPATHY VIJAY \A/PIT PFTITION NO: 8724/2025 APHC010168202025 [3460] 0?* THE Between; ...PETITIONER Dudekula Saleema AND ...RESPONDENT(S) The State Of Andhra Pradesh and Others Counsel for the Petitioner; 1 .ELURU SESHA MAHESH BABU Counsel for the Respondent{S); 1.GP for muncipal admn urban dev 2 THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE NYAPATHY VIJAY WRIT PETITION NO: 8724/2025 The Court made the following Order; The present writ petition is filed questioning the impugned proceedings vide RoC.No.203/2024-G1 dated 23.03.2025 issued by the respondent No.2, whereunder the petitioner was alleged to have encroached 70 square feet of municipal property in Sy.No.279 and was called upon to remove the encroachments within the stipulated time. The petitioner claims to be the owner of the land situated in S.No.279 admeasuring 792 sq.ft, from east to west 32 feet and from North to South 24 feet having acquired the same from mother-in-law through a registered sale deed dated 05.11.2015. Since then, the petitioner is in peaceful possession and enjoyment of the said property by constructing a house with Door No.20-196 and also obtained electricity services and also paying house tax to the 2'"'^ respondent. While so, a writ petition was filed before the Hon’ble Court in W.P.No.6231 of 2024 by the party questioning the inaction of the municipal authorities in not taking any action on the encroachments of municipal properties. Pursuant to that, a show cause notice was issued on the 3. 3 petitioner alleging encroachment of 70 land and thereafter impugned notice that no documents were filed by the petitioner to defence. Subsequently, hearing No.2 on 19.03.2025 and claim over the alleged encroached passed. Hence, the petition is filed. square feet of municipal was issued on the ground substantiate her was conducted by respondent as petitioner could not substantiate her area, the impugned order was 4. The learned counsel for the show cause notice petitioner submits that the was issued with reference to conducted by a town surveyor on 04.03.2025 and the conducted without prior notice to the petitioner and the the same was aiso not furnished to the a survey same was copy of petitioner. 5. The learned Standing counsel on instructions signed by the Commissioner of Venkatagiri Muicipality submitted that the action pursuant to the order passed regarding non- removal of encroachments in 19'^ ward of Jettipalem Road, Venkatagiri. was initiated against the petitioner by this Court in W.P.No.6231 of 2024, filed 6. Having heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Standing Counsei for Municipai Administration and Urban 4 Kr Development, this Court is of the opinion that survey report should have been furnished to the petitioner and survey should have been conducted to their knowledge and with reference to the available documents claimed by the petitioner. Since the title documents of the petitioner were not taken into consideration at the time of survey or at the time of passing the impugned order the impugned order cannot be sustained. Therefore, the writ petition is disposed of with following 6. directions: The impugned notice RoC.No.203/2024-G1 dated i) 23.03.2025 is set aside. This Respondent No.2 to furnish town survey report to the ii) petitioner and may conduct fresh survey with reference to the title documents of the petitioner and the link documents and thereafter take action, if encroachment by the petitioner is still made out. This exercise may be completed within a period of eight iii) weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. Accordingly, the Writ Petition is disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs. As a sequel, pending applications, if any, shall stand closed. Sd/- P.VINOD KUMAR assistant registrar SECTION OFFICER //TRUE COPY// To, . The Principle Secretary, Municipal Administration Development Department, State of Andhra Velagapudi, Guntur. 2. The Commissioner, Venkatagiri Municipality District. 3. One CC to Sri Eluru Sesha f 4. One qp ef Sri'Gudapati Lakshmi Muplcipalities,[9Pyc] 5. Twp CCs to GP for Municipal Administration High Court of Andhta Pradesh. 6. Three CD Copies. and Urban Pradesh, A.P. Secretariat, Venkatagiri, Tirupati Mahesh Babu, Advocate [OPUC] Narayana, SC for and Urban Development, [OUT] ssb . HIGH COURT DATED:03/04/2025 ORDER SP WP.No.8724 of 2025 I M SEP 2025 I Current Section . C9. DISPOSING OF THE W.P. WITHOUT COSTS