APHC010288482019 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH WEDNESDAY, TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE NINALA JAYASURYA WRIT PETITION N Between: APSRTC Employees Development Association, Regd.No.563/2008, 111 145-A-8-14-12, Prashanth Nagar, Madanapalle, Chittoor District, Rep. by its Secretary. AND 1. The State of Andhra Pradesh, Represented by its Principal Secretary, Revenue Department, Secretariat, Velagapudi, Amaravathi. 2. The District Collector, Chittoor District, Chittoor, A.P. 3. The Sub-Collector/Revenue Divisional Officer, Madanapalle, Chit District, A.P. 4. The Tahsildar, Madanapalle Mandal, Chittoor District, A.P Counsel for the Petitioner Counsel for the Respondents: The Court made the following The grievance of the petitioner association in the present writ petition, in short, is that despite the recommendations/proposals submitted by the respondent No.3 vide letter 19.3.2014 and the respondent No.4 vide letter Roc.A/12/2014, dt.14.11.2014, no action has been taken by the respondent Nos.1 and 2. IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) DAY, THE TENTH DAY OF DECEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE NINALA JAYASURYA WRIT PETITION No.13239 of 2019 APSRTC Employees Development Association, Regd.No.563/2008, 111 12, Prashanth Nagar, Madanapalle, Chittoor District, Rep. by AND 1. The State of Andhra Pradesh, Represented by its Principal Secretary, Revenue Department, Secretariat, Velagapudi, Amaravathi. 2. The District Collector, Chittoor District, Chittoor, A.P. Collector/Revenue Divisional Officer, Madanapalle, Chit 4. The Tahsildar, Madanapalle Mandal, Chittoor District, A.P ...Respondents Counsel for the Petitioner : Mr.V.Surya Kiran Kumar Counsel for the Respondents: G.P. for Revenue The Court made the following ORDER: grievance of the petitioner association in the present writ petition, in short, is that despite the recommendations/proposals submitted by the respondent No.3 vide letter Roc.B2/3098/2014, dated 19.3.2014 and the respondent No.4 vide letter Roc.A/12/2014, dt.14.11.2014, no action has been taken by the respondent Nos.1 and 2. IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH TH DAY OF DECEMBER THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE NINALA JAYASURYA APSRTC Employees Development Association, Regd.No.563/2008, 111- 12, Prashanth Nagar, Madanapalle, Chittoor District, Rep. by ...Petitioner 1. The State of Andhra Pradesh, Represented by its Principal Secretary, Collector/Revenue Divisional Officer, Madanapalle, Chittoor 4. The Tahsildar, Madanapalle Mandal, Chittoor District, A.P. ...Respondents Mr.V.Surya Kiran Kumar grievance of the petitioner association in the present writ petition, in short, is that despite the recommendations/proposals Roc.B2/3098/2014, dated 19.3.2014 and the respondent No.4 vide letter Roc.A/12/2014, dt.14.11.2014, no action has been taken by the respondent Nos.1 and 2. 2 2. The learned counsel for the petitioner referring to various averments made in the affidavit filed in support of the writ petition, submits that the petitioner association comprises of serving and retired personnel of A.P. State Road Transport Corporation, that the members of the said association purchased an extent of Acs.16.47 cents situated in Survey Nos.529/3A, 529/3C, 530/1, 530/2A, 530/2C, 533/1A, 533/1C and 533/2A of B.K.Palle Village from the registered owners of the land. He submits that after taking possession of the land in the year 1985, the members of the association developed a lay-out, which was approved vide Proceedings No.51/91 by the competent Authority and thereafter construction of houses was taken up. 3. He submits that the members of the association are living in the houses constructed by them. Be that as it may. He submits that on the earlier occasion the petitioner association filed Writ Petition No.27461 of 2010 aggrieved by the inqction of the respondents therein in finaziling the alienation proceedings in respect of the house sites of the petitioner association despite Memo No.2172/Assn.IV(2)/2008–2, dated 19.3.2009 of the respondent No.1 therein and for consequential directions. He submits that the said writ petition was disposed of by an order dated 26.8.2013 with a direction to the respondents to finalize the land alienation proceedings within a period of three (3) months from the date of communication of the said order. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits thereafter the matter was examined by the respondent Nos.3 and 4 and they made recommendations to the respondent No.2 vide letters referred to supra dated 19.3.2014 and 14.11.2014 and thereafter no further action was taken by the respondents and in those circumstances, the petitioner association filed the present writ petition. 4. No counter affidavit is filed on behalf of the respondents and no information is forthcoming as to the proposals/recommendations of the 3 said respondents made to the respondent No.2, though this Court had already granted time on 26.11.2025. 5. In such circumstances, instead of keeping the writ petition pending, this Court deems it appropriate to dispose of the same with a direction to respondent No.2 to take necessary action on the proposals submitted by respondent Nos.3 and 4 referred to supra as expeditiously as possible, within a period of four (4) weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. Before taking appropriate action and decision on the proposals submitted by respondent Nos.3 and 4, an opportunity of hearing shall also be afforded to the Secretary of the petitioner association. 6. With the above directions, the writ petition is disposed of. No order as to costs. Miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shall stand closed. _____________________ NINALA JAYASURYA, J Date: 10.12.2025. vasu