IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH :: AMARAVATj^^ (Special Original Jurisdiction) WEDNESDAY, THE TWENTY NINETH DAY OF JANUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE V.SUJATHA WRIT PETITION NO: 1938 OF 2025 I \ m » W Between: Sala Venkanna, R/o.Door No;2-75, Chodudikkulu, Pedana Municipal Area, Pedana, Krishna District. S/o. Sala Nancharaiah, Aged 38 years, Occ; Business ...PETITIONER AND The Pedana Municipality, Pedana, Krishna District Rep by its Municipal Commissioner. State of Andhra Pradesh, Rep. by its Principal Secretary, Municipal Administration Department, Secretariat, Velagapudi, Amaravathi, Guntur District. 1. 2. The ...RESPONDENTS under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying that in Petition the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased to issue a writ, order or direction more particularly one in the of Writ of Mandamus to declare the action of the Respondent No.1 in NO.13/1072/PDL/UL/2023 dated 18-01-2025 in nature issuing impugned Notice confirming the Confirmation Notice dated 06-04-2023 without considering 27-03-2023 and instructing the the reply submitted by the Petitioner on Petitioner to bring down the constructions in to the room frame within 7 days arbitrary, illegal and contrary to the orders in W.P.No. 10385/2023 dated this Honble Court consequently set aside the as 05-05-2023 passed by impugned Notice No.13/1072/PDL/UL/2023 dated 18-01-2025 issued by the 1®' Respondent in the interest of justice. IA NQ:‘1 OF 2025 la under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances * Petition • 'stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to suspend the impugned Notice No.13/1072/PDL/UL/2023 dated St Respondent pending disposal of the Writ 18- 01-2025 issued by the 1 Petition in the interest of justice. Counsel for the Petitioner: M/s. P SRILATHA REDDY Counsel for the Respondent No.1: M/s. SIREESHA RANI VALLABHANENI, SC FOR MUNICIPALITIES Counsel for the Respondent No.2: GP FOR MUNICIPAL ADMINISTRATION AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT The Court made the following: ORDER sr APHC010037882025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3333] WEDNESDAY ,THE TWENTY NINETH DAY OF JANUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE V.SUJATHA WRIT PETITION NO: 1938/2025 Between: ...PETITIONER Sala Venkanna AND ...RESPONDENT(S) The Pedana Municipality and Others Counsel for the Petitioner: 1.PSRILATHA REDDY Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. 2.GP MUNCIPALADMN AND URBAN DEVAP The Court made the following: 2 ORDER: This writ petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking the following relief:- f " to issue a writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus to declare the action of the Respondent No.1 in issuing impugned Notice NO.13/1072/PDN/UC/2023, dated 18.01.2025 in confirming the Confirmation Notice dated 06.04.2023 without considering the reply submitted by the Petitioner on 27.03.2023 and instructing the Petitioner to bring down the constructions into the room frame within 7 days as arbitrary, illegal and contrary to the orders in .W.PNo 10385/2023 dated 05.05.2023 passed by this Hon’ble Court consequently set aside the impugned Notice No.13/1072/PDN/UC/2023, dated 18.01.2025 issued by the P' Respondent in the interest of justice. ” 2. The case of the petitioner is that, the petitioner is the absolute owner and possessor of the land of an extent of 436.2 Sq. Yards situated in R.S.R.N0.671/1A of Pedana Village and Mandal, Krishna District, having been purchased by registered sale deed Doc.No.765/2005 and Doc.No.1359/2008. While the matter being so, respondent issued provisional notice, dated 17.03.2023 to the petitioner and the petitioner submitted explanation on 27.03.2023 to the said notice. Subsequently, confirmation notice, dated petitioner filed 06.04.2023 has been issued. Questioning the same W.P.No.10385 of 2023 and the same was partly allowed by setting aside the confirmation order, dated 06.04.2023 with a further direction to the respondent No.1 that the respondent No.2 shall pass fresh order after considering the reply submitted by the petitioner. the respondent No.1/Municipal While the matter stood thus Commissioner, Pedana Municipality, ignoring the orders of this Court issued notice vide Notice No.13/1072/PDN/UC/2023, dated 18.01.2025, stating that 3. "f -V 3 respondent No.1 earlier issued provisional notice dated 17.03.2023 and as failed to submit reply to the said notice the petitioner was the construction into the rule frame within seven (7) the the petitioner directed to bring down the date of receipt of the notice. The grievance of the petitioner is r days from submitted reply on 27.03.2023 to the dated 17.03.2023, respondent No.1 having received the impugned order vide Notice No.13/1072/PDN/UC/2023, that, even though the petitioner provisional notice same, passed the dated 18.01.2025 by ignoring the orders passed by this Court. Therefore, the petitioner has filed the present writ petition challenging the said notice. learned counsel for the petitioner, learned Government Pleader for Municipal Administration and Urban Development for respondent No.2 and Ms. Sireesha Rani, learned Standing Counsel for Municipal Corporation for respondent No.1. 5. Today, when the matter came up for hearing, it is brought to the notice Court by the learned Standing Counsel that though the explanation submitted by the petitioner on 27.03.2023 was endorsed by the respondents’ Corporation, the same is not available in their office. In view of the same, they have stated in the confirmation order dated 18.01.2025 that the petitioner has not submitted any reply to the provisional notice dated 17.03.2023. 4. Heard of this On perusal of the petitioner’s affidavit and instructions submitted by the be understood that immediately after 6. learned Standing Counsel, it can receiving provisionai notice dated 17.03.2023, the petitioner submitted an expianation on 27.03.2023 and the same was received and endorsed by the 4 respondent corporation also. Inspite of the same, only on the sole ground that it is not available in their office, respondents have passed the confirmation order on 18.01.2025 duly stating that the petitioner has not submitted any reply to the provisional notice dated 17.03.2023. As such the confirmation order dated 18.01.2025, which is impugned in the present writ petition is liable to be set aside. Accordingly, the Writ Petition is allowed and confirmation order vide issued by the 7. Notice NO.13/1072/PDN/UC/2023, dated 18.01.2025, respondent No.1, is hereby set aside and liberty is granted to the petitioner to resubmit the explanation to the provisional notice, dated 17.03.2023, within a period of two (02) weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order, the respondents shall conduct the enquiry and proceed in Thereafter, accordance with law. There shall be no order as to costs. sequel. Interlocutory Applications pending, if any, in this Writ Petition, shall stand closed. As a SD/- K SRINIVASA RAJU ASSISTANT REGISTRAR //TRUE COPY// f ^pTofficer SEC To, 1. The Municipal Commissioner, Pedana Municipality, Pedana, Krishna District. 2. The Principal Secretary, Municipal Administration Department, State of Secretariat, Velagapudi, Amaravathi, Guntur District. Andhra Pradesh, 3. One CC to M/s. P. Srilatha Reddy, Advocate [OPUC] CC to M/s. Sireesha Rani Vallabhaneni, SC for 4. One Municipalites[OPUC] 5. TwoCCsto _ High Court of Andhra Pradesh. [OUT] 6. Three CD Copies. GP for Municipal Administration and Urban Development, ssb HIGH COURT DATED:29/01/2025 ORDER WP.No.1938 of 2025 0'^ OF 1 s 2 ^ FEB 2025 ^ . Current Section ALLOWING THE W.P. WITHOUT COSTS