MANTHENA MADAN MOHAN RAJU v. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH
WP/29965/2025 · 2025-11-18
Harinath N
Original Suitbody2025
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 45873 (AP) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 45873 (AP) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
APHC010574962025
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3457] WEDNESDAY, THE NINETEENTH DAY OF NOVEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE HARINATH.N WRIT PETITION No:29965/2025 Between: Manthena Madan Mohan Raju and Others ...PETITIONERS AND The State Of Andhra Pradesh and Others ...RESPONDENTS Counsel for the Petitioner:
1. Sri G.M.SWAMULU Counsel for the Respondents:
1. Ld. GP MUNCIPAL ADMN AND URBAN DEV AP
2. Sri. A.S.C. Bose, Ld. Standing Counsel for R.2 & R.3 The Court made the following:
-2- W.P. No.29965 OF 2025 Date of order:19.11.2025
THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE HARINATH.N WRIT PETITION No.29965 OF 2025 ORDER:
1. The petitioner is aggrieved by the inaction of the 2nd respondent in not considering his representation dt.02.07.2025, which, according to the petitioner, was handed over to the 2nd respondent.
2. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is seeking indulgence of the 2nd respondent in restraining the third parties from constructing a house on the land allegedly belonging to the petitioner. The learned counsel further submits that the petitioner has obtained a decree of injunction from the Principal Junior Civil Judge, Guntur, in O.S.No.680 of 2015. It is submitted that, unmindful of the decree in favour of the petitioner, the 2nd respondent is not considering the representation of the petitioner.
3. The learned Standing Counsel appearing for the 2nd respondent submits that the representation of the petitioner was not received in their office, as there is no endorsement on the same. It is also submitted that the petitioner has not made any of the so called third parties, who, according to the petitioner, have encroached upon his land, as respondents in the petition.
-3- W.P. No.29965 OF 2025 Date of order:19.11.2025
4. Considering the submissions, the writ petition is disposed of, leaving it open for the petitioner to approach the competent authority against specific encroacher/s. No costs.
5. Miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending in this writ petition shall stand closed. ___________________ JUSTICE HARINATH.N
BV