Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Andhra Pradesh · body

2025 DAILYLAW 44834 (AP)

MADDINENI RAMBABU v. THE STATE OF AP

WP/10589/2025 · 2025-04-29

Subba Reddy Satti

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

APHC010193802025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3331] WEDNESDAY ,THE THIRTIETH DAY OF APRIL TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE SUBBA REDDY SATTI WRIT PETITION NO: 10589/2025 Between: Maddineni Rambabu and Others ...PETITIONER(S) AND The State of AP and Others ...RESPONDENT(S) Counsel for the Petitioner(S): 1. D KRISHNA MURTHY Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. S PRANATHI 2. GP MUNCIPAL ADMN AND URBAN DEV AP The Court made the following order: Heard Sri D. Krishna Murthy, learned counsel for the petitioner, and Sri K. Dheeraj, learned counsel representing Smt. S. Pranathi, learned standing counsel for respondent No.2. 2. The petitioners, villagers of Ananthavaram Village, Thulluru Mandal, Guntur District, filed the above writ petition to declare the action of respondent No.2, in closing down public tank (Daggubati Tank) in an extent of Ac.9-18 cents in survey No.139 of Ananthavaram Village, Thulluru Mandal, Guntur District, for the purpose of laying road, as illegal and arbitrary. SRS,J W.P.No.10589 of 2025 3. Learned counsel for respondent No.2 produced a copy of the instructions furnished by respondent No.2. The relevant portion of the instructions is extracted here under: “It is further submitted that out of the total extent of Ac.9.18 cents, an extent of Ac.1.68 cents has to be affected due to laying of E7 Trunk Road in Sy.No.139 of Ananthavaram village for the purpose of Development Capital Region, Amaravati. A culvert is also proposed in the said land.” 4. Learned counsel for respondent No.2 submitted that without disturbing the tank, the road will be laid after constructing a culvert. 5. In reply, learned counsel for the petitioner requested to place on record, the instructions furnished by respondent No.2. 6. The instructions furnished by respondent No.2 are placed on record. 7. Given the instructions of respondent No.2, this writ petition is disposed of at the admission stage with the consent of learned counsel on either side, directing respondent No.2 not to disturb the ‘tank’ and to lay the road after construction of a culvert at the subject tank. No costs. As a sequel, pending miscellaneous petitions, if any, shall stand closed. ___________________________ JUSTICE SUBBA REDDY SATTI Date: 30.04.2025 IKN SRS,J W.P.No.10589 of 2025 195 THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE SUBBA REDDY SATTI WRIT PETITION NO: 10589 of 2025 Date: 30.04.2025 IKN