Mr. Duggi Venkateswarlu, v. The Government of Andhra Pradesh rep., by its Principal
WP/33844/2014 · 2025-09-11
Harinath N
body2025
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 49778 (AP) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 49778 (AP) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
APHC010360832014
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3457] FRIDAY, THE TWELFTH DAY OF SEPTEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE HARINATH.N WRIT PETITION NO: 33844/2014 Between:
1. MR. DUGGI VENKATESWARLU,, S/O DUGGI VENKATARATHAM, AGED ABOUT 64 YEARS, R/O D.NO.21/02/64, PEDDA BAZAR,NELLORE TOWN, SPSR NELLORE DISTRICT. ANDHRA PRADESH.
2. MRS. CHUNDURI ARUNA,, W/O SATYANARAYANA, AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS, D.NO.26/2/42, VEDAYAPALEM, DEELIP SCHOOL, ANDHRAKESARI NAGAR, NELLORE TOWN, SPSR NELLORE DISTRICT, ANDHRA PRADESH.
...PETITIONER(S) AND
1. THE GOVERNMENT OF ANDHRA PRADESH REP BY ITS PRINCIPAL, SECRETARY, MUNICIPAL ADMINISTRATION & URBAN DEVELOPMENT, ANDHRA PRADESH SECRETARIAT, HYDERABAD.
2. THE MUNICIPAL CORPORATION OF NELLORE REP BY ITS, COMMISSIONER, NELLORE, SPSR NELLORE DISTRICT.
3. THE TOWN PLANNING OFFICER, MUNICIPAL CORPORATION OF NELLORE, NELLORE SPSR NELLORE DISTRICT.
4. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, NELLORE, SPSR NELLORE DISTRICT.
5. THE TASHILDAR, NELLORE, SPSR NELLORE DISTRICT.
6. THE SUPERINTENOENT ENGINEER, ROAD & BUILDINGS, NELLORE, SPSR NELLORE DISTRICT.
2
7. THE SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, NELLORE, SPSR NELLORE DISTRICT
...RESPONDENT(S): Counsel for the Petitioner(S):
1. Y L SIVA KALPANA REDDY Counsel for the Respondent(S):
1. GP FOR HOME (AP)
2. GP FOR REVENUE (AP)
3. GP-MUNCIPAL ADMN AND URBAN DEV(AP)
4. A S C BOSE (SC FOR MUNICIPAL CORPORATIONS AP)
5. GP FOR ROADS BUILDINGS (AP) The Court made the following:
3
ORDER:-
Learned counsel for the respondents submits that, though the respondent authorities proposed to take up the construction on GNT road and to mark certain portions of the petitioner’s property. Subsequently, that plan was shelved and the survey report was discarded.
2. It is also stated in the written instructions that any further proposed road-widening activity would be in accordance with the procedure of law.
3. Recording the same, the Writ Petition is closed. No order as to costs. As a sequel, interlocutory applications pending, if any, shall stand closed.
____________________ JUSTICE HARINATH.N Date: 12.09.2025 SR