APHC010041022013 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH (Special Original Jurisdiction) FRIDAY ,THE FOURTEENTH DAY OF FEBRUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE V.SUJATHA WRIT PETITION NO: 32770/2013 Between: Chamala Nageswara Rao, The Government Of A P and Others Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. E SAMBASIVA PRATAP Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. G RONALD RAJU 2. A S C BOSE (SC FOR MUNICIPAL CORPORATIONS AP) 3. A SREEDHAR 4. GP FOR MUNCIPAL ADMN AND URBAN DEV The Court made the following: 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) FRIDAY ,THE FOURTEENTH DAY OF FEBRUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE V.SUJATHA WRIT PETITION NO: 32770/2013 ...PETITIONER AND The Government Of A P and Others ...RESPONDENT(S) Counsel for the Petitioner: E SAMBASIVA PRATAP Counsel for the Respondent(S): A S C BOSE (SC FOR MUNICIPAL CORPORATIONS AP) GP FOR MUNCIPAL ADMN AND URBAN DEV The Court made the following: IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH [3333] ...PETITIONER ...RESPONDENT(S) 2 ORDER: This Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking the following relief: “…to issue a Writ Order or direction more particularly one in the nature of WRIT OF MANDAMUS declaring the action of 3rd respondent in allowing unauthorized construction being made by 4th respondent at Door No.7D-10-1/1 Pitchikagunta Kathepu Street, Eluru West Godavari District without any sanction plan duly approved in spite of rejecting construction permission and issuing notice to the 4th respondent dated 13.09.2013 for removal of unauthorized construction as bad illegal arbitrary and contrary to the provisions of The Hyderabad Municipal Corporation Act 1955 and consequentially to direct the 3rd respondent to demolish all the structures raised by the 4TH respondent at Door No.7D-10-1/1 Pitchikagunta Kathepu Street Eluru West Godavari District and to pass..” 2. Heard Sri V.V.N.Narasimhulu, learned counsel representing Sri V.Venugopala Rao, learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Government Pleader for Municipal Administration and Urban Development for respondent No.1 and 2, Sri A.S.C Bose, learned Standing Counsel for respondent No.3. 3. When the matter came up for admission on 18.11.2013, this Court passed the following interim order: “ ….there shall be interim direction to the 3rd respondent to stop further construction being made by 4th respondent at Door No.7D-10-1/1, Pitchikagunta, Kathepu Street, Eluru, West Godavari District, forthwith, considering representation dated 10.11.2013 made to the 3rd respondent.” 4. Today, when the matter came up for hearing, learned Standing Counsel for respondent No3 i.e., Municipal Commissioner. furnished a copy of instructions, wherein it is stated that after the death of the 4th respondent, his 3 son i.e., Sri Bala Vara Prasad has obtained building permission for the said building for G + 1 vide BA.No.1075/0175/B/Ele/PCK GUNTA/2017 dated 05.09.2017 and constructed G + 1 residential building with an extent of 100.90 sq.mts. In accordance with the building permission, building was completed and Sri Balla Vara Prasad is residing in the said building. Further stated that the Municipal Corporation has approached the petitioner i.e., C.H. Nageswara Rao, and he stated that they have settled the dispute long back and there was no issue between them and he is willing to withdraw the writ petition. 5. In view of the fact that the petitioner’s father has constructed G+1 residential building in an extent of 100.90 square meters after duly obtaining building permission from the respondent authorities, this Court feels that no further cause survives in this writ petition. 6. Accordingly, the Writ Petition is closed. There shall be no order as to costs. As a sequel, Interlocutory Applications pending, if any, in this Writ Petition, shall stand closed. __________________ JUSTICE V.SUJATHA 14.02.2025 KKV 4 98 THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE V.SUJATHA WRIT PETITION NO: 32770/2013 14.02.2025 KKV