1 APHC010027072023 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3332] WEDNESDAY,THE THIRTY FIRST DAY OF DECEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE RAVI CHEEMALAPATI WRIT PETITION NO: 1370/2023 Between: 1. BALA AYYASWAMY, S/O BALA PEDDA HANUMANTHU, AGED 50 YEARS, OCC CULTIVATION, RIO. H.NO.5-76A, SRIRANGAPURAM VILLAGE, VELDURTHY MANDAL, KURNOOL DISTRICT, A P - 518467. 2. BALA YEDUKONDALU,, S/O BALA PEDDA HANUMANTHU, AGED 48 YEARS, OCC CULTIVATION, R/O. H.NO.5-76, SRIRANGAPURAM VILLAGE, VELDURTHY MANDAL, KURNOOL DISTRICT, A P - 518467. ...PETITIONER(S) AND 1. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY PANCHAYAT RAJ DEPARTMENT SECRETARIAT BUILDINGS,VELAGAPUDI, GUNTUR DISTRICT. 2. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, KURNOOL DISTRICT, KURNOOL. 3. THE SUPERINTENDENT ENGINEER, PANCHAYAT RAJ 2 DEPARTMENT, KURNOOL DISTRICT, KURNOOL. 4. THE ASSISTANT EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, MANDAL PARISHAD, VELDURTHY MANDAL, KURNOOL DISTRICT. 5. MANDAL DEVELOPMENT OFFICER, VELDURTHY MANDAL, KURNOOL DISTRICT. 6. SRIRANGAPURAM GRAM PANCHAYAT, REP BY PANCHAYAT SECRETARY, SRIRANGAPURAM VILLAGE, VELDURTHY MANDAL, KURNOOL DISTRICT ...RESPONDENT(S): Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased topleased to issue an order, writ or direction more particularly in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the Respondents 3 to 6 in taking steps for widening the existing road near petitioners houses, by 16 feet, there by effecting petitioners property covered by residential house bearing No.5-76A of 1st petitioner and House bearing No.5-76 of 2nd petitioner situated in Srirangapuram Village, Veldurthy Mandal, Kurnool District - 518216, by declaring the action of the Respondents 3 to 6, as illegal, arbitrary and violative of Article 14, 19(1)(g) of Constitution of India and pass IA NO: 1 OF 2023 Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased pleased to direct the Respondents 3 to 6 not to interfere with the petitioners property covered by residential house bearing No.5-76A of 1st petitioner and House bearing No.5- 76 of 2nd petitioner situated in Srirangapuram Village, Veldurthy Mandal, Kurnool District - 518216, pending disposal of the Writ Petition and pass 3 Counsel for the Petitioner(S): 1. B SIVA KESAVA REDDY Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. VENKATA REDDY GAJJALA SC FOR ZPP, MPP, AND GRAM PANCHAYAT 2. GP FOR REVENUE 3. GP FOR PANCHAYAT RAJ RURAL DEV 4. Mattegunta.Sudhir,Standing Counsel For Z.P.Ps,M.P.Ps,Gram Panchayats The Court made the following order: Challenging the action of respondent Nos.3 to 6 in taking steps for widening the existing road by 16 feet near petitioners houses, thereby effecting the petitioners property covered by residential house bearing No.5-76A of the 1st petitioner and house bearing No.5-76 of the 2nd petitioner situated in Srirangapuram Village, Veldurthy Mandal, Kurnool District, the present writ petition is filed. 2. Heard Sri B. Siva Kesava Reddy, learned counsel for the petitioners, Sri M. sudheer, learned Standing Counsel for the Gram Panchayat and Ms. Naga Chandrika, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Panchayat Raj. 4 3. Learned counsel for the petitioners, while reiterating the contents of the affidavit, submitted that the respondent authorities, without issuing any notice and without following due process of law, are proposing to widen the existing road by 16 feet, affecting the petitioners’ property covered by residential houses. He further submitted that the proposed road is shown as 8 feet; however, on account of mala fide and political considerations, the road widening is proposed to 16 feet at the point where petitioners’ houses are situated. If such action is allowed to continue, it will not only affect the rights of the petitioner but would be left with no houses. As such, prayed to pass appropriate orders protecting the interest of the petitioner. 4. Learned Standing Counsel, on instructions, submitted that no work has been sanctioned for construction of road in front of the petitioners’ houses and the Gram Panchayat has not taken any steps for widening of the existing road, as alleged by the petitioners in the writ petition. As such, the writ petition is devoid of merits and deserves dismissal. 5 5. In reply, learned counsel for the petitioner requested to record the submissions of the learned Standing Counsel and prayed to close the writ petition. 6. Taking into consideration the submissions of the learned Standing Counsel that the Gram Panchayat is not proposing to widen the existing road affecting the petitioners’ houses, there remains nothing for further adjudication in the writ petition and is liable to be closed. 7. Accordingly, the writ petition is closed. There shall be no order as to costs. Miscellaneous applications pending, if any, shall stand closed. ____________________________ JUSTICE RAVI CHEEMALAPATI Date: 31.12.2025 ANS 6 233 THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE RAVI CHEEMALAPATI WRIT PETITION NO: 1370/2023 Date: 31.12.2025 ANS