APHC010042532017 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3333] THURSDAY, THE THIRTEENTH DAY OF FEBRUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SMT. JUSTICE V.SUJATHA WRIT PETITION No. 27057 of 2017 Between: Atluri Sridhar ...PETITIONER AND The Gudivada Municipality and Others ...RESPONDENT(S) Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. G VIJAYA BABU Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. V. SIREESHA RANI, STANDING COUNSEL 2. GP FOR MUNCIPAL ADMN. AND URBAN DEV. 3. P. SURESH KUMAR The Court made the following: 2 VS,J W.P.No.27057 of 2017 ORDER : This Writ Petition, under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, is filed 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 the 1st, 2nd and 3rd Respondents in not taking action against the 5th respondent as per the representation given by the petitioner on 08.05.2017 with respect to illegal construction undertaken by him contrary to the sanctioned plan for construction by the 1st respondent in premises bearing D.No.16/VLT, corresponding to Ward No.16, Gudivada, in an extent of 452.09 Sq. Meters as illegal, arbitrary, contrary to Andhra Pradesh Building Rules, 2012, contrary to G.O.Ms.No.569, Dt.23.08.2008 and also Article 14 of the Constitution of India and consequently direct the 1st respondent to take appropriate action against the 5th respondent as per law by cancelling the initial permission granted to the 5th respondent for construction of building in premises bearing D.No.16/VLT, corresponding to Ward No.16, Gudivada in an extent of 452.09 Sq Meters.” 2. It is the case of the petitioner that his family runs a marriage function hall in the name and style of Sri Atluri Basavaiah Suryakumari Kalyana Mandapam in Ward No.16, S.N.Puram, Gudivada Town, and adjacent to the said function hall, he owns a site of 150 sq. yards bearing H.No.16/358-9, where they operate a kitchen to cater to marriage parties. While that being so, respondent No.5 herein has started making unauthorized constructions at D.No.16/VLT, in an extent of 452.09 sq.mts., situated in the same lane in which the petitioner is running the marriage function hall and kitchen, and having 3 VS,J W.P.No.27057 of 2017 obtained building permission for construction of two upper floors, the respondent No.5 is proceeding with construction of five upper floors in deviation of the sanctioned plan, and he has also constructed rooms in stilt floor, which is meant solely for parking purpose. It is also contended that respondent No.5 has occupied the public road on the eastern side of his building, creating significant difficulty to the petitioner to reach his function hall and kitchen and also causing traffic jam. 3. It is the grievance of the petitioner that in the above circumstances, he has submitted a representation dated 08.05.2017 to respondent Nos.1 to 3 and has also issued a legal notice dated 31.05.2017, requesting them to take necessary action against the illegal constructions being made by respondent No.5 in deviation of the sanctioned plan, and thereupon, the respondent No.2- Commissioner, APCRDA, vide letter dated 14.06.2017, directed the respondent No.1- Municipality to take necessary action in the matter, but despite the same, no action has been taken by the respondent authorities. 4. Today, when the matter is taken up for hearing, it is brought to the notice of this Court by the learned counsel for the respondents that during pendency of this writ petition, the deviations made by respondent No.5 were regularized on his payment of requisite penalization charges, vide proceedings dated 25.09.2023 of the 4 VS,J W.P.No.27057 of 2017 Commissioner, Andhra Pradesh Capital Regional Development Authority, and as such, all proceedings and action of enforcement initiated and contemplated against the said building were withdrawn. A copy of the said proceedings dated 25.09.2023 is placed on record. 5. In view of the above subsequent development, whereby the deviations made by respondent No.5 were regularized upon his payment of requisite penalization charges, nothing survives for consideration in this writ petition. 6. Accordingly, the writ petition is closed. No order as to costs. Consequently, interlocutory applications, if any, pending in this case shall stand closed. ___________________ JUSTICE V. SUJATHA Date: 13.02.2025 IBL 5 VS,J W.P.No.27057 of 2017 THE HONOURABLE SMT. JUSTICE V. SUJATHA WRIT PETITION No.27057 of 2017 Dt: 13.02.2025 IBL