IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH :: AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) FRIDAY, THE NINTH DAY OF MAY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE NYAPATHY VIJA^Y WRIT PETITION NO: 13134 OF 709fi ^ s|i ■K . Between: M/s. Aroon ,The Raymond Shop, 9 th Lane, Arundelpet, Guntur-522 002, Rep.by its Partner Hari Kishan Sal Tulabandula, S/o. Tulabandula Ranga Sai, aged about 46 years, Hindu, R/o.7-11-206, Annapurna Nilayam, 5 Lane, Kakumanuvathota, Guntur, Guntur District - 522 002. th ...PETITIONER AND 1. The State of Andhra Pradesh, Rep. by its Principal Secretary, Municipal Administration and Urban Development Department, Secretariat, Velagapudi, Amaravathi, Guntur District. 2. The Guntur Municipal Corporation, Rep.by its Commissioner, Guntur Municipal Corporation Office, Guntur, Guntur District. 3. The Collector-cum-Land Acquisition Officer, The Land Acquisition and Rehabilitation and Resettlement Authority, Guntur, Guntur District. ...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 an order or direction may more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the respondents in not following procedure contemplated under Sec.28 of The Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition and Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act 2013 (Act 30 of 2013) as arbitrary, illegal and unconstitutional and provisions of Act 30 of 2013 and consequently direct the respondents to follow the procedure contemplated under Sec.28 of The Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act 2013 (Act 30 of 2013)^ in Land Acquisition and lA NO: 1 OF 202fi Petition under Section ISI^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 not to interfere with possession and enjoyment of the property i.e. M/s. Aroon, The Raymond Shop, 9*'' Lane, Arundelpet, Guntur-522 002, pending disposal of the above Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI K. SAIRAM MURTHY writ petition. Counsel for the Respondent No.1: GP FOR MUNICIPAL ADMINISTRATION AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT Counsel for the Respondent No.2: SRI A.S.C.BOSE, SC FOR MUNICIPAL CORPORATIONS Counsel for the Respondent No.3: GP FOR LAND ACQUISITION ^ The Court made the following: ORDER APHC010250862025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH ATAMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3460] FRIDAY THE NINTH DAY OF MAY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE NYAPATHY VIJAY WRIT PETITION NO: 13134/2025 Between: Aroon ,the Raymond Shop ...PETITIONER AND The State Of Andhra Pradesh and Others ...RESPONDENT(S) Counsel for the Petitioner: 1.KSAIRAM MURTHY pounsel for the Respondent(S): 1.GP FOR LAND ACQUISITION 2.GP MUNQIPAL ADMN AND URBAN DEVAP The Court made the following: .9 THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE NYAPATHY VI3AY W.P.No.13134 of 2025 ORDER: The present writ petition is filed declaring the action of the Respondents in not following procedure contemplated under Section 28 of the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition and Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013 as arbitrary and illegal. 2. Heard learned counsel for the Petitioner and learned Standing Counsel for Guntur Municipal Corporation. 3. During the course of hearing, learned counsel for the Petitioner would submit that the issue involved in this Writ Petition \ is squarely covered by the order dated 22.01.2025 passed by this Court in W.P.No.1400 of 2025 and requested to pass a similar order in this Writ Petition also. The same is not disputed by the learned counsel appearing for the Respondents. The operative portion of the said order, reads as under: “....In view of the same, instead of keeping the writ petition pending, the writ petition is disposed of directing the 2nd respondent not to interfere with the possession of the petitioner without following the procedure as contemplated under the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition Resettlement Act, 2013." In view of the order, this Writ Petition i and Rehabilitation and 4. same, for the reasons alike in the aforesaid IS also disposed of, in terms of the order, in W.P.No.1400 of 2025. dated 22.01.2025 passed by this Court There shall be no order as to costs. 5. Registry is directed to attach the 22.01.2025 passed by this Court i order. copy of the order, dated in W.P.No.1400 of 2025 to this As a sequel, the miscellaneous petitions if any shall stand dismissed. / Sd/- M RAMESH BABU DEPUTY REGISTRAR //TRUE COPY// SECTIQ To ICER 1. The Principal Secretary, Municipal Administration Development Department. State of Andhra Pradesh, Velagapudi, Amaravathi. Guntur District. and Urban Secretariat, 2. The Commissioner, Guntur Municipal Corporation, Corporation Office, Guntur, Guntur District. 3. The Collector- Guntur Municipal cum-Land Acquisition Officer, The Land Acquisition and Rehabilitation and Resettlement Authority, Guntur, Guntur District.^ 4. One CC to Sri K. Sairam Murthy, Advocate [OPUC] 5. One CC to Sri A.S.C. Bose, SC for Municipal Corporations[OPu6]^ 6. Two CCs to GP for Municipal Administration High Court of Andhra Pradesh. [OUT] 7. Two CCs ot GP for Land Acquisition, High Court of Andhra Pradesh [OUT] 8. Three CD Copies. (Along with a copy of the order dated 2025) and Urban Development, 22.01.2025 in W.P. No.1400 df HIGH COURT DATED;09/05/2025 ORDER WP.No.13134of2025 ^oPano^^ 1° S 21| SFP 202F m C9 disposing of the w.p. WITHOUT COSTS 1 APHC010025772025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3333] WEDNESDAY, THE TWENTY SECOND DAY OF JANUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE V.SUJATHA WRIT PETITION NO: 1400/2025 Between: ...PETITIONER Gudipudi Anjani Kumari AND The State of Andhra Pradesh and another ...RESPONDENT(S) Counsel for the Petitioner: 1.AKKISHORE REDDY Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1 .GP MUNCIPAL ADMN AND URBAN DEV AP The Court made the following: / 2 ORDER: This Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking the following relief; to issue a Writ or order or direction more particularly one in the nature of WRIT OF MANDAMUS declaring the action of the Respondents herein particularly Respondent No. 2 in touching upon the Petitioner’s building situated at D. No. 6-19-38/2, Arundalpet, Guntur City, Guntur District (Shop No. 24 given by Municipality) and giving markings without having any right or authority highhandedly and subjecting the petitioner to distress as nothing but illegal, erroneous, highhanded and violative of Article 14, 19(i)(g), 21 and 300-A of the Constitution of India and consequently direct the Respondents much less the Respondent No. 2 not to meddle with the petitioner’s building situated at D.No.6-19-38/2, Arundalpet, Guntur City, Guntur District (Shop No.24 given by Municipality) without following the procedure contemplated under The Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013 ” Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned Government Pleader 2. for Municipal Administration and Urban Development for respondent No.1 and learned Standing Counsel for respondent No.2. The petitioner is the absolute owner and possessor of the house 3. bearing Door No.6-19-38/2, Arundalpet, Guntur City, Guntur District (shop No.24 given by Municipality), where the petitioner is residing and carrying on his own business. While the matter being so, the respondents are intending to give markings to their shop for road widening purpose without following due process of law and without paying fair compensation to her. However, the case of the petitioner is also that the respondents have orally informed that they will give TDR certificate instead of fair compensation. % 3 4. Today, when the matter came up for hearing, Mr.A.S.C.Bose, learned Standing Counsel for respondent No.2, on instructions, informed this Court that they are intending to issue a notice under Section 146 of APMC Act, 1955, to the petitioner and follow the procedure as contemplated under Sections 146 and 147 of the Hyderabad Municipal Corporation Act, 1955 much less the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition and Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013. In view of the same, instead of keeping the writ petition pending, the writ petition is disposed of directing the 2"*^ respondent not to interfere with the possession of the petitioner without following the procedure as contemplated under the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition and Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013. 5. 6. With the above direction, the Writ Petition is disposed of. No costs. Miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, in this Writ Petition shall stand closed. JUSTICE V.SUJATHA Date: 22.01,2025 KGR