APHC010465822025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) SMS i: THURSDAY. THE TWENTY FIFTH DAY OF SEPTEMBi TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE ^ PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE HARINATH.N WRIT PETITION NO: 23586 OF 2025 Between: Oruganti Sripadma, W/o Venkata Ramana, aged 40 years. D.No.37-1-245 Opp. Mastan Darga. Trunk Road. Ongole. Prakasam District. ...Petitioner AND 1. The State of Andhra Pradesh. Represented by its Principal Secretary. Municipal Administration Department and Urban Development Department. Secretariat Buildings, Velagapudi, Amaravathi, Guntur District. 2. The Ongole Municipal Corporation, Rep. By its Commissioner. Ongole Municipal Corporation Office, Opp. Church Center, Ongole. ...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 a Writ or order or direction more particularly one in the nature of WRIT OF MANDAMUS declaring the action of the 2nd Respondent in a) giving markings to petitioner's property, 396 Sq.ft of land in T.S. No.362, D.No.37-1-245, along with a RCC roof structure (264 Sq.feet ground floor and 264 sq.feet First floor) with D.No.37-1-245, Assessment No.1035016855, Ward No.5, Block 6, Trunk Road, Ongole namely Aswith Hotel and Curry ID Point b) Initiating steps to demolish said property of the petitioner by dispossessing her from his land, without following the procedure under The Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013 as illegal, arbitrary, unconstitutional and consequently direct the Respondent No.2 not to interfere with the possession and ownership of Petitioner over his property without following the procedure contemplated under The Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013. 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 may be pleased to direct the 2"^ Respondent and its staff not to interfere with the possession and enjoyment of petitioner over his property, 396 Sq.ft of land in T.S. No.362, D.No.37-1-245, along with a RCC roof structure (264 Sq.feet ground floor and 264 sq.feet First floor) with D.No.37-1-245, Assessment No. 1035016855, Ward No.5, Block 6, Trunk Road, Ongole namely “Aswith Hotel & Curry Point” any manner including trespass, dispossession, demolition or blocking the ingress/egress from shops, or canvassing to stop the customers. in Counsel for the Petitioner: M/S. PARUCHURIINDUMATHI Counsel for the Respondent No.1: GP MUNCIPAL ADMN AND URBAN DEV AP Counsel for the Respondent No.2: SRI A S C BOSE The Court made the following order: APHC010465822025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) r [3457] THURSDAY,THE TWENTY FIFTH DAY OF SEPTEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE HARINATH.N WRIT PETITION NO: 23586/2025 Between: 1.0RUGANTI SRIPADMA, W/O VENKATA RAMANA, AGED 40 YEARS, D.NO.37-1-245 OPP. MASTAN DARGA, ROAD, ONGOLE, PRAKASAM DISTRICT. TRUNK ...PETITIONER AND 1.THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REPRESENTED BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT, VELAGAPUDI, AMARAVATHI, MUNICIPAL ADMINISTRATION SECRETARIAT BUILDINGS GUNTUR DISTRICT. 2.THE ONGOLE MUNICIPAL CORPORATION, REP. BY ITS COMMISSIONER, OFFICE, OPP. CHURCH CENTER, ONGOLE. ONGOLE MUNICIPAL CORPORATION ...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 topleased to issue a Writ or order or direction more particularly one in the nature of WRIT OF MANDAMUS declaring the action of the 2nd Respondent in a) giving markings to petitioner's property, 396 Sq.ft of land in T.S. No.362, D.No.37-1-245, along with a -2- HN, J W.P.No.23586 2025 RCC roof structure (264 Sq.feet ground floor and 264 sq.feet First floor) with D.No.37-1-245, Assessment No. 1035016855, Ward No.5, Block 6, Trunk Road, Ongole namely Aswith Hotel and Curry Point b) Initiating steps to demolish said property of the petitioner by dispossessing her from his land, without following the procedure under The Right to Fair Compensation and Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013 Transparency in Land as illegal, arbitrary, unconstitutional and consequently direct the Respondent No.2 not to interfere with the possession and ownership of Petitioner over his property without following the procedure contemplated under The Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013, 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 may be pleased pleased to direct the 2nd Respondent and its staff not to interfere with the possession and enjoyment of petitioner over his property, 396 Sq.ft of land in T.S. No.362, D.No.37-1-245, along with a RCC roof structure (264 Sq.feet ground floor and 264 sq.feet First floor) with D.No.37-1-245, Assessment No. 1035016855, Ward No.5, Block 6, Trunk Road, Ongole namely “Aswith Hotel & Curry Point” in any manner including trespass, dispossession, demolition or blocking the ingress/egress from shops, or canvassing to stop the customers Counsel for the Petitioner: 1.PARUCHURI INDUMATHI Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1.GP MUNCIPAL ADMN AND URBAN DEVAP -3- HN, J W.P.No.23586 2025 THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE HARINATH.N WRIT PETITION No.23586 OF 2025 ORDER: The petitioner is aggrieved by the action of the 2'^'^ Respondent in a) giving markings to petitioner's property, 396 Sq.ft of land in T.S. 1. No.362, D.No.37-1-245, along with a RCC roof structure (264 Sq.feet ground floor and 264 sq.feet First floor) with D.No.37-1-245, Assessment No. 1035016855, Ward No.5, Block 6 Trunk Road, Ongole namely Aswith Hotel and Curry Point b) Initiating steps to demolish said property of the petitioner by dispossessing her from his land, without following the procedure under The Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013 , as arbitrary and illegal. 2. Heard the submissions of the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned standing counsel for Ongole Municipal Corporation. 3. During the course of hearing, learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the issue involved in this writ petition is squarely covered by the order dated 08.09.2025 passed by this Court in W.P.No.21175 of 2025 and requested to pass a similar order in this writ petition also. The same is not disputed by the learned counsel -4- HN,J W.P.No.23586_2025 appearing for the Respondents. The operative portion of the said order, reads as under: ‘....the writ petition is disposed off directing the respondent authorities possession and enjoyment of the petitioner’s property without following due process of law, making it further clear that the authorities shall have to follow the Act 30 of 13 while acquiring the land of the petitioner.” 4. In view of the same, for the reasons alike in the aforesaid order, this writ petition is also disposed of, in terms of the order, dated 08.09.2025 passed by this Court in W.P.No.21175 of 2025. There shall be no order as to costs. not to disturb the respondent 5. Registry is directed to annex a copy of the order in W.P. No.21175 of 2025 to the order in the present writ petition. Miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending in this writ petition shall Sd/- M SRlMtVAS ASSISTANT REGISTRAR stand closed. //TRUE COPY// To, SECTION OFFICER 1. The Principal Secretary, State of Andhra Pradesh, Municipal Administration Department and Urban Development Department, Secretariat Buildings, Velagapudi, Amaravathi, Guntur District. 2. The Commissioner, Ongole Municipal Corporation, Ongole Municipal Corporation Office, 0pp. Church Center, Ongole. 3. One CC to M/S. PARUCHURIINDUMATHI Advocate [OPUC] 4. Two CCs to GP FOR MUNCIPAL ADMN AND URBAN DEV, High Court of Andhra Pradesh [OUT] 5. Two CD Copies Gsg (Along with Copy of Order dated 08.09.2025 in WP. No. 21175 of 2025) HIGH COURT DATED:25/09/2025 ORDER WP NO. 23586 OF 2025 DISPOSING THE WP WITHOUT COSTS 6APHC010408582025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3457] MONDAY,THE EIGHTH DAY OF SEPTEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE HARINATH.N WRIT PETITION NO: 21175/2025 Between: 1.KOTA SRIMANNARAYANA, S/0. SATYANARAYANA, AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS, R/0 37-1-316-, ANDHRA COFFEE, TRUNK ROAD, ONGOLE, PRAKASAM DISTRICT. PRESENTLY RESIDING AT 28-1- 87, NEAR ENUGU CHETTU, ONGOLE 523001. ...PETITIONER AND 1.THE STATE OF AP, REPRESENTED BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, MUNICIPAL, ADMINISTRATION DEPARTMENT AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT BUILDINGS, VELAGAPUDI, AMARAVATHI, GUNTUR DISTRICT. 2.THE ONGOLE MUNICIPAL CORPORATION, REP. BY ITS COMMISSIONER, ONGOLE MUNICIPAL CORPORATION OFFICE, OPP. CHURCH CENTER, ONGOLE. ...RESPONDENT(S): Counsel for the Petitioner: 1 .SASANKA BHUVANAGIRI Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1 .GP FOR MUNCIPAL ADMN URBAN DEV 2. A S C BOSE (SC FOR MUNICIPAL CORPORATIONS AP) The Court made the following: 2 a ORDER:- The petitioner is aggrieved by the action of the 2"^^ respondent in marking the petitioner’s property admeasuring 54 square yards of land in T.S.No.49 along with a RCC roof structure, wherein the petitioner is running a shop in the name and style of Andhra Coffee and General Stores bearing DoorNo.37-1-316. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is pressurized by the 2"'' respondent and their officers to accept the TDR certificates in return for handing over 54 square yards property for the purpose of road widening. It is submitted that the respondent authorities cannot force the petitioner to accept TDR bonds while acquiring the property belonging to the petitioner for public purposes. It is also submitted that the TDR bonds would not meet the requirements of the petitioner as an alternative to compensation for the land acquired. The learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that the 2'^'^ respondent would have to follow the provisions of the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013, in the event the respondent authorities intend to acquire any portion of the petitioner’s land for public purposes. The learned Standing Counsel appearing for the 2""' respondent submits that the petitioner is issued a notice under Sections 145 and 146 of the 2. 3. 4. Andhra Pradesh Municipal Corporation Act, 1955, and objections of the petitioner are called for, indicating that the petitioner would be issued TDR 3 ti bonds @1:4 which can be utilized by the petitioner or could be put to sale and liquidated subsequently. It is also submitted that the respondent authorities would follow the procedure contemplated under Sections 145 and 146 of the Municipal Corporation Act, 1955 and accordingly this writ petition can be disposed of by recording the submissions of the learned Standing Counsel that the respondent authorities shall follow the provisions of Chapter V of the Municipal Corporation Act, 1955 relating to acquisition of property. The Sections 145, 146 and 147 of the Municipal Corporation Act, 1955 relate to the power and procedure for acquisition of immovable property. 5. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Standing Counsel for the 2"^^ respondent. 6. Section 146 deals with acquisition of immovable property by agreement. 7. Section 147 deals with procedure when immovable property cannot be acquired by agreement. 8. Section 145 empowers the Corporation to acquire any property on payment of compensation. The insistence of the 2'^^ respondent in indicating the TDR bonds as an alternative for the land affected and required for public purpose would amount 9. to coercive tactics of the respondent authorities. 10. In view of Section 147 of the Act of the Municipal Corporation, the provisions of the Right to Fair. Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013, would have to be essentially followed by the respondent authorities. It is always open to the 4 m petitioner to accept the offer of TDR bonds. However, in cases where the landowners do not accept the TDR bonds offered by the respondent authorities, the respondent authorities would have to follow the provisions of the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013. On these considerations, the writ petition is disposed off directing the respondent authorities not to disturb the possession and enjoyment of the petitioner property without following due process of law, making it further clear that the respondent authorities shall have to follow the Act 30 of 13 while acquiring the land of the petitioner. There shall be no order as to costs. 11. 12. Pending miscellaneous petitions, if any, shall stand closed. JUSTICE HARINATH.N 08.09.2025 PNS