IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH ■ (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: 2059 OF 2()9R AMARAVATI Between: Visakhapatnam District, Andhra Pradesh. Visakhapatnam ...Petitioner AND Its Wsawtfratntm' 50. Madhavadhara, ^ Andhra Pradesh. Represented ...Respondents Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court be pleased to issue a Writ or Order or Direction may more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus, declaring the action of the respondents more particularly respondents 4 and 5 herein in interfering with the possession of the property of the petitioner in Sy. No. 44P Murali Nagar, Madhavadhara in Door No. 39-8-76/1/111, Visakhapatnam, Visakhapatnam District, Andhra Pradesh in Electricity Service Connection No. as illegal, arbitrary and also India 111193816349997 oppose to Article 300-A of the Constitution of consequentially direct the respondents ,4 herein not to interfere particularly respondents 3 and with the possession of the property of the Murali Nagar District, Andhra Pradesh. petitioner in Sy. No. 44P in Door No. 39-8-76/1/111 Madhavadhara, Visakhapatnam, Visakhapatnam lA NO: 1 OF 2n9.i; Petition under Section 151 stated in the affidavit tiled in support of the petition, the High Court may be P eased to direct the respondents particularly respondents 3 and 4 herein no '0 mterfere w,th the possession of the property of the petitioner in Sy. Visakhao r '^^''^avadhara, isakhapatnam, Visakhapatnam District, Andhra Pradesh of the above writ petition. Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI V.SAI Counsel for the Respondent No.1: CPC praying that in the circumstances pending disposal KUMAR GP FOR MUNICIPAL ADMN & URBAN DEVELOPMENT 5: SRI A.S.C.BOSE, SC for MUNICIPALITIES Counsel for the Respondents 2 to The Court made the following order: APHC010039062025 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: 2059/2025 Between: ...PETITIONER Bodakurthi Nooka Raju AND ...RESPONDENT(S) The State Of Andhra Pradsh and Others Counsel for the Petitioner: 1.VSAI KUMAR Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1.GP FOR MUNCIPALADMN URBAN DEV The Court made the following: ORDER: This writ petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of seeking the following relief;- India ....to issue a Writ or Order or Direction more particulariy one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the respondents more particularly respondent Nos. 4 and 5 herein in interfering with the possession of the property of the petitioner in Sy.No.44P in Door No. 39-8-76/1/111, Murali Naga,r Madhavadhara Visakhapatnam, Visakhapatnam District, Andhra Pradesh [in Electricity Service Connection No. 111193816349997] as iiiegal, arbitrary and also oppose to Article 300- A of the Constitution of India and consequentially direct the respondents particularly respondent Nos. 3 and 4 herein not to interfere with the possession of the property of the petitioner in Sy.No.44P in Door No.39-8-76/1/111, Murali Naga,r Madhavadhara Visakhapatnam, Visakhapatnam District, Andhra Pradesh and to pass ” 2. The case of the petitioner is that, the petitioner has been in possession of the AC sheet house in Door No.39-8-76/1/111 Murali Nagar, Madhavadhara, Visakhapatnam, Visakhapatnam District, Andhra Pradesh from the past 20 years. It is also the case of the petitioner that having identified his possession over the said property, the electricity department has given power connection to the petitioner’s house and the Municipality has also assigned a Door Number to the petitioner’s house. While the matter being even without issuing any notice, the respondent No.4 under the instructions of the respondent No.3 tried to interfere with the peaceful possession and enjoyment of the property in possession of the petitioner. Feeling aggrieved by the same, the present writ petition is filed. so. 3. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned Government Pleader for Municipal Administration and Urban Development for respondent No.1 and learned Standing Counsel for Municipal Corporation for respondent Nos. 2 to 5. 3 4. Today, when the matter on oral instructions submitted that the up for hearing, learned Standing Counsel petitioner is not the came owner of the said is residing in the said land for has not produced any document to ! property, but however, he is the encroacher and i the past 20 years. However, the petitioner prove that he is the owner of the said property. As such, they wouid foiiow due process of iaw, if at aii they intend to interfere with the possession scheduled property. over the 5. In view of the fact that eviction, instead of keeping the appropriate to dispose of the writ. 4 and 5 not to interfere with the property in Sy.No.44P Madhavadhara, Visakhapatnam, without following due process of law. 6. Accordingiy, the Writ Petition is disposed of. There shaii be to costs. even an encroacher is entitled for a notice before writ petition pending, this Court feels it petition, by directing the respondent Nos. petitioner’s possession and enjoyment of the in Poor No.39-8-76/1/111, Visakhapatnam District, Andhra Murali Nagar, Pradesh, no order as As a sequei, Interiocutory Applications Petition, shall stand closed. pending, if any, in this Writ SOI- N NAGAMMA ASSISTANT REGIST^^ OFFICER 1. The Principal Secretary Municipal and Urban Development Authority, State of Andhra Pradesh, Secretariat Buildings at Velagapudi, Guntur District, Andhra Pradesh. 2. The Commissioner, Greater Visakhapatnam Municipal Corporation Visakhapatnam, Visakhapatnam District, Andhra Pradesh. 3. The Zonal Commissioner, Zone-V, Greater Visakhapatnam Municipal Corporation, Visakhapatnam, Visakhapatnam District, Andhra Pradesh. //TRUE COPY// SE To, Ik 4. The Town Planning Officer, Greater Visakhapatnam Municipal Corporation, Visakhapatnam, Visakhapatnam District, Andhra Pradesh. 5. The Ward Secretary, Ward Sachivalayam, Ward No. 50, Madhavadhara, Visakhapatnam, Visakhapatnam District, Andhra Pradesh. 6. One CC to Sri V Sai Kumar, Advocate [OPUC] 7. One CC to Sri A.S.C. Bose, SC for Municipalities [OPUC] 8. Two CCs to GP for Municipal Administration & Urban Development, High Court of Andhra Pradesh. [OUT] 9. Two CD Copies / RAM <4 HIGH COURT A DATED:29/01/2025 g 2 8 FFB 2025 S iS, J? ^ . Current aeciion . 'y' ORDER WP.No.2059 of 2025 DISPOSING OF THE WP WITHOUT COSTS