1 APHC010044332025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3333] MONDAY, THE THIRD DAY OF FEBRUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE V.SUJATHA WRIT PETITION NO: 2327/2025 Between: Jadda Sujathamma ...PETITIONER AND The State of Andhra Pradesh and others ...RESPONDENT(S) Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. SIVAPRASAD REDDY VENATI Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. GP FOR MUNCIPAL ADMN URBAN DEV 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, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of WRIT OF MANDAMUS declaring the action of the 2nd respondent in not considering the petitioner’s repeated representations which are submitted on dated 29.12.2024 and 30.12.2024 respectively for stabilizing the resident building of 4th respondent and to forbear from erecting the cell tower situated in Plot No.160 and 161, bearing Door No.26-1-1819, comprised in Sy.No.370/1, Ward No.26 at Kaveri Avenue, Kondayapalem, Nellore, Nellore Municipal Corporation area without taking necessary safety precautions is illegal, irregular, arbitrary and violative of provisions of relevant municipal bye-laws by which construction of buildings in Municipal Corporations in the state of Andhra Pradesh is governed and offends Art. 14 and 21 of Constitution of India and Consequently direct the respondents to forbear from erecting the cell tower situated in Plot no 160 and 161 bearing Door No.26.1.1819, comprised in Sy.No.370/1, Ward No.26 at Kaveri Avenue, Kondayapalem, Nellore, Nellore Municipal Corporation area till Respondents gets independent structural stability certificate from reputed organization or institution like JNTU university…...” 2. The petitioner is the absolute owner and possessor of a house site with an extent of 9.82 ankanams, bearing plot Nos.160 and 161, comprised in Sy.No.370/1, ward No.26, at Kaveri Avenue, Kondayapalem, Nellore. 3. The grievance of the petitioner is that, adjacent to the northern side of the petitioner’s house, the 4th respondent has purchased a house site with an extent of 10 ankanams (or 80 Sq.yards). Though the 4th respondent was granted permission for construction of the construction of ground + two floors, contrary to the said building permission, the 4th respondent constructed Ground + four floors in the said small extent of land, which is unsafe to the nieghbouring land owners. As such, the petitioner submitted representations 3 on 29.12.2024 and 30.12.2024 to the respondent authorities, requesting them to initiate action as against the 4th respondent herein. However, the respondent authorities have not initiated any action on the representations. As such, the petitioner filed the present writ petition. 4. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr.A.S.C.Bose, learned Standing Counsel for Municipal Corporation. 5. During hearing, Mr.A.S.C.Bose, learned Standing Counsel representing the 2nd respondent has informed this Court that immediately after receiving the said representations from the petitioner, the 2nd respondent called for a stability certificate from the 5th respondent and immediately after receiving the said certificate from the 5th respondent, the 2nd respondent would take action in accordance with law. 6. In view of the above, instead of keeping the writ petition pending, this Court feels it appropriate to dispose of the writ petition by directing the 2nd respondent to take appropriate action on the representation dated 29.12.2024 and 30.12.2024 submitted by the petitioner in accordance with law. 7. With the above direction, the Writ Petition is disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs. Miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, in this Writ Petition shall stand closed. __________________ JUSTICE V.SUJATHA Date: 03.02.2025 KGR