IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH :: AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) THURSDAY, THE THIRTIETH DAY OF JANUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SMT. JUSTICE V.SUJATHA WRIT PETITION NO: 2053 OF 2025 Between: Adireddy Vijaya, W/o. Suryanarayana, Aged about 40 years, Occ: Househoid Duties, R/o. D No. 22-121-75/3, Dayal Nagar, Pedagantyada, Visakhapatnam. ...PETITIONER AND 1. State of Andhra Pradesh, Rep.by its Principal Secretary Revenue Department, Secretariat, Velagapudi, Guntur District. 2. The District Collector, Visakhapatnam District. 3. The Revenue Divisional Officer, Visakhapatnam. 4. The Tahsildar, Pedagantyada, Visakhapatnam. 5. Greater Visakhapatnam Municipal Corporation, Rep. by its commissioner, Visakhapatnarii. ...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 any writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the respondents in threatening to demolish the house of the petitioner in order to dispossess her is illegal, arbitrary and violation of Article 14, 21 and 300 A of the Constitution of India and to consequently to direct the respondents not to interfere with the petitioners house situated in an extent of 166 Sq. Yds covered by D. No. 22-121-75/3, Sy. No. 43/1, Dayal Nagar, Pedagantyada, Visakhapatnam District. " lA NO: 1 OF 2025 Petition under Section 151 CPC praying ^at in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the writ petition, the High Court may be pleased to direct the respondent not to demolish the house of the petitioner situated in an extent of 166 Sq. Yds covered by D. No. 22-121- 75/3, Sy. No. 43/1, Dayal Nagar, Pedagantyada, Visakhapatnam District pending disposal of the writ petition. Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI V. V. SATISH Counsel for the Respondent Nos.1 to 4 : GP FOR MUNICIPAL ADMN & URBAN DEVELOPMENT Counsel for the Respondent No.5 : SRI A.S.C. BOSE, SC FOR MUNICIPALITY The Court made the following: ORDER m APHC010038132025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3333] THURSDAY ,THE THIRTIETH DAY OF JANUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE V.SUJATHA WRIT PETITION NO: 2053/2025 Between: Adireddy Vijaya ...PETITIONER AND State Of Andhra Pradesh and Others ...RESPONDENT(S) Counsel for the Petitioner: 1.VVSATISH Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1.GP FOR MUNCIPAL ADMN URBAN DEV 2.GP FOR REVENUE The Court made the following: ORDER: The present Writ Petition came to be filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking the following relief:- “...to issue any writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the respondents in threatening to demolish the house of the petitioner in order to dispossess her is illegal, arbitrary and violation of Article 14, 21 and 300 A of the Constitution of India and to conseguently to direct the respondents not to interfere with the petitioners house situated in an extent of 166 Sq. Yds covered by D. No. 22-121-75/3, Sy. No. 43/1, Dayal Nagar, Pedagantyada, Visakhapatnam District and to pass...” 2. The petitioner is in possession of a residential house bearing D.No.22-121-75/3 situated in an extent of 166 square yards in Sy.No.43/1, Dayal Nagar, Pedagantyada, Visakhapatnam District. The entire land in Sy.No.43/1 is classified as government land. The Government has introduced a scheme for regularization of government sites in occupation of private individuals by virtue of G.O.Ms.No.60 Revenue (Lands I) Department, dated 16.02.2023. As such, the petitioner has submitted an application on 16.09.2023 to the 3^^^ respondent seeking regularization. While so, on 20.01.2025, the 4**’ respondent along with the staff of the 5**^ respondent visited the petitioner’s premises and have demanded the petitioner to vacate the house within 48 hours failing which, the petitioner’s property would be demolished. Aggrieved by the aforesaid action of the respondents, the petitioner has filed the present writ petition. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned Government Pleader for Municipal Administration and Urban Development and learned Government Pleader for Revenue. 3. Today when the writ petition came up for hearing, learned Government Pleader for Revenue has produced a copy of instructions of the 4*^ respondent dated 25.01.2025 wherein it is stated that the schedule property in Sy.No.43/1 to an extent of 150 square yards was already regularized vide G.0.388 bearing an application No.VZGI001-62-75602 for residential purpose. Accordingly, the house assessment number was also given to the petitioner. But, however, in spite of the same, the petitioner has again encroached the government land for utilizing the same for commercial purpose. 4. Learned Standing Counsel for respondent No.5 has also furnished a copy of instructions dated 30.01.2025 wherein it is stated that there is no involvement or interference of the 5‘^ respondent office in the eviction process of the petitioner and further stated that the structure in question was unauthorized and encroached upon the government land, necessitating regulatory intervention. However, learned Standing Counsel orally submitted that if at all they intend to interfere with the petitioner’s possession over the subject property, they would follow due process of law. During the course of arguments, learned counsel for the petitioner has informed this Court that upon instructions of the Joint Collector, the Tahsildar has already demolished the compound wall of the petitioner’s property without any prior notice and without following the due process contemplated under law, which was also admitted by learned Government Pleader for Revenue. However, learned Government Pleader for Revenue has submitted that the respondent authorities will follow due procedure of law, if at all they intend to interfere with the petitioner’s possession over the remaining extent of the subject property. 5. 6. Taking into consideration the aforesaid submissions, this writ petition is disposed of and the respondents are directed not to threaten to 7. m demolish the petitioner’s house bearing D.No.22-121-75/3, in an extent of 150 square yards in Sy.No.43/1, Dayal nagar, Pedagantyada, Visakhapatnam District, without following due process of law. Accordingly, with the above direction, this writ petition is disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs. 8. Miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, in this Writ Petition shall stand closed. A SAVfTRT GOWm assistant registrar officer //true copy// To, Pradesh, Secretariat. Vel^gapudt Gririt?r®S"Jf"'- 2. The District Collector, Visakhapatriam District ■ The Reveriue Divisiorial Officer, Visakhapatnam 4. The Tahsiidar, Pedagantyada. Visakhapatnam, Visakhapatnam^^^^’ Visakhapatnam State of Andhra Municipal Corporation 6. One CC to Sri V. V. Satish, Advocate fOPUCJ 8. One CC to Sri A.S.C. 9. Two CCs to GP FOR n & Urban Development, High Court Bose, SC for Municipality (OPUC) revenue. High Court of Andhra Pradesh [OUT] 10. Three C.D. Copies Cnr HIGH COURT DATED:30/01/2025 ORDER WP.No.2053 of 2025 ac 18 MAR 2025 g -v' ^ Current Section DISPOSING OF THE W.P. WITHOUT COSTS