APHC010011022023 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3332] TUESDAY,THE SECOND DAY OF DECEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE RAVI CHEEMALAPATI WRIT PETITION NO: 655/2023 Between: 1. S. JEELAN BASHA,, S/O S. SHAIKSHAVALI, AGED 41 YEARS, OCC- CULTIVATION, R/O 6-144, SHALL COLONY, HOLAGUNDA POST, HOLAGUNDA VILLAGE AND MANDAL, KURNOOL DISTRICT, ANDHRA PRADESH-518346. ...PETITIONER AND 1. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, PANCHAYAT RAJ AND RURAL DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT SECRETARIAT BUILDINGS, VELAGAPUDI, AMARAVATHI, GUNTUR DISTRICT. 2. THE COMMISSIONER, PANCHAYAT RAJ AND RURAL DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT, TADEPALLY, GUNTUR DISTRICT. 3. THE DISTRICT PANCHAYAT OFFICER, KURNOOL DISTRICT, KURNOOL. 4. THE MANDAL PARISHAD DEVELOPMENT OFFICER, MANDAL PARISHAD DEVELOPMENT OFFICE, HOLAGUNDA MANDAL, KURNOOL DISTRICT. 5. HOLAGUNDA GRAMPANCHAYAT, REP. BY ITS PANCHAYAT SECRETARY, HOLAGUNDA VILLAGE AND MANDAL, KURNOOL DISTRICT. ...RESPONDENT(S): 2 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 an appropriate Writ, Order or Direction, more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the respondents, particularly the action of the 5th respondent in issuing the impugned Notice dated 06.12.2022, through which rejecting the claim of the petitioner for construction of steps and altering the door towards northern side of his building vide his applications dated 10.11.2022 and 23.11.2022 and further declaring the action of the 5th respondent in straight away directing the petitioner not to make any construction and alteration under Section 97 of Andhra Pradesh Panchayat Raj Act, 1994 through the impugned notice dated 06.12.2022 at the behest of the some of the Villagers and their objections without following due process of law is highly illegal, arbitrary, unjust, improper, contrary to law, amounting to non-application of mind, amounting to colourable exercise of power and in violation of fundamental rights guaranteed under Constitution of India and consequently set-aside the impugned notice dated 06.12.2022 issued by the 5th respondent and to pass 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 to suspend the impugned notice issued by the 5th respondent in rejecting the claim of the petitioner, pending disposal of the Writ Petition and pass IA NO: 2 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 to direct the respondents to reconsider the claim of the petitioner vide his applications dated 10.11.2022 and 23.11.2022 for construction of steps and altering the door towards northern side of his building, pending disposal of the Writ Petition and pass Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. SUSHMA YAGANTI Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. VENKATA REDDY GAJJALA SC FOR ZPP, MPP, AND GRAM PANCHAYAT 3 2. GP FOR PANCHAYAT RAJ RURAL DEV The Court made the following: ORDER: Impugning the notice dated 06.12.2022 rejecting the applications of the petitioner dated 10.11.2022 & 23.11.2022 for construction of House in his house site, the present writ petition is filed. 2. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and M.Sudheer, learned Standing Counsel for Gram Panchayat for the respondents. 3. Learned Standing Counsel for Gram Panchayat , on written instructions dated 04.11.2025, submitted that the 5th respondent-Gram Panchayat is not interfering with the possession and enjoyment of the petitioner or obstructing the petitioner from making construction, as such, prayed to close the writ petition. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner prayed to record the said submission and close the writ petition. 5. Taking their submissions into consideration, as the respondents are not interfering with the petitioners property, there is no purpose in keeping the writ petition pending inviting counter and the writ petition is liable to be closed. 6. Accordingly, the Writ Petition is closed. It is needless to observe that if at all the respondents have an intention to interfere they have to follow due process of law. There shall be no order as to costs. 4 As a sequel, miscellaneous applications, pending if any, shall stand closed. _____________________________ JUSTICE RAVI CHEEMALAPATI Date: 02nd December, 2025 RKS