APHC010314512023 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3332] WEDNESDAY,THE THIRD DAY OF DECEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE RAVI CHEEMALAPATI WRIT PETITION NO: 16234/2023 Between: 1. KARUNAKAR REDDY, S/O B.SIVA SHANKAR REDDY, AGED ABOUT 56 YEARS, OCC. CULTIVATION, R/O D.NO. 1-130-23, DIGUVAPADU ROAD, GARGEYAPURAM VILLAGE, KURNOOL MANDAL AND DISTRICT. ...PETITIONER AND 1. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, PANCHAYAT RAJ AND RURAL DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT, VELAGAPUDI, AMARAVATHI, GUNTUR DISTRICT. 2. TIRUCHANUR GRAM PANCHAYAT, REP. BY ITS SECRETARY, TIRUCHANUR VILLAGE, TIRUPATI RURAL MANDAL, TIRUPATI 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 tomay be pleased to issue an appropriate Writ, Order or Direction, more particularly one in the nature of Wri'- of Mandamus, declaring the inaction of the 2nd 2 respondent herein in taking action with regard to the illegal and unauthorized construction made in my land in Sy.No. 437/6 situated at Tiruchanur village, near Ponnakaluva Mandapam, Tirupati RuralMandal Tirupati District, inspite of the written complaint dt. 10-1-2023 in. Spandana following by reminder representation dt. 19-5-2023, as being illegal, arbitrary, unjust and unconstitutional and consequently direct the 2nd respondent to pull down/demolish the illegal and unauthorized constructions made in the above said land, and to grant such IA NO: 1 OF 2023 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 may be pleased to direct the 2 respondent herein to consider and take appropriate action pursuant to the presentation dt. 10-1-2023 and reminder representation dt 19-5-2023, pending disposal of the main Writ Petition, and to pass such Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. BABUJI TENNETI Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. VENKATA REDDY GAJJALA SC FOR ZPP, MPP, AND GRAM PANCHAYAT 2. GP FOR PANCHAYAT RAJ RURAL DEV The Court made the following Order: Declaring the inaction of the 2nd respondent-Gram Panchayat in taking action against the illegal and unauthorized construction made on the petitioner’s land situated in Sy.No.437/6 of Tiruchanur Village, near Ponnakaluva 3 Mandapam, Tirupati Rural Mandal, Tirupati District, in spite of the petitioner’s written complaint dated 10.01.2023, as illegal and arbitrary, the present writ petition is filed. 2. Heard Sri Babuji Tenneti, learned counsel for the petitioner, Sri M. Sudheer, learned Standing Counsel for the Gram Panchayat and Ms. Naga Chandrika, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Panchayat Raj. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner, while reiterating the contents of the affidavit, submitted that the petitioner is the absolute owner and possessor of the land to an extent of Ac.0.58 cents situated in Sy.No.437/6P of the said village, having purchased the same for valuable consideration under a Registered Sale Deed bearing Doc.No.640/2011, dated 11.02.2011. Since then, the petitioner has been in peaceful possession and enjoyment of the subject property without any interference from anybody. He further submitted that when certain unconcerned persons encroached upon a portion of the petitioner’s land and proceeded with the construction illegally, the same was brought to the notice of the authority concerned and the said authority, by reply dated 10.02.2023, confirmed the 4 existence of encroachments and unauthorized construction. Despite such confirmation, no appropriate action has been initiated to remove the said encroachments. As such, prayed to pass appropriate orders protecting the interest of the petitioner. 4. Learned Standing Counsel, on instructions, submitted that there is a civil dispute between the petitioner and certain persons in the said village with regard to the subject property. In view of the same, the grievance of the petitioner cannot be considered by the official respondents and the petitioner has to approach the competent civil court for redressal of his grievance. As such, the writ petition is not maintainable and deserves to be dismissed. Accordingly, prayed to dismiss. 5. The main grievance of the petitioner is that despite confirming the existence of encroachments and unauthorized construction on the subject land, no action has been initiated to remove the said encroachments. The contention of the learned Standing Counsel is that there is a civil dispute with regard to the subject property. When there is a civil dispute with regard to the subject property, neither the respondent authorities nor this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India can adjudicate the 5 grievance of the petitioner. The petitioner has to approach the competent civil Court for redressal of his grievance. 6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, the Writ Petition is disposed of, granting liberty to the petitioner to approach the competent civil Court for redressal of his grievance, if he so advised. However, if any individual has made construction without approved building plan, the Gram Panchayat shall take appropriate steps in accordance with law. There shall be no order as to costs. As a sequel, miscellaneous applications, pending if any, shall stand closed. _____________________________ JUSTICE RAVI CHEEMALAPATI Date: 03.12.2025 ANS 6 393 THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE RAVI CHEEMALAPATI WRIT PETITION NO: 16234/2023 Date: 03.12.2025 ANS