IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3457] SATURDAY,THE TWENTIETH DAY OF DECEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE HARINATH.N WRIT PETITION NO: 35386/2025 Between: 1. CHELLE HEMALATHA, W/O LATE MOHAN RAO, AGED ABOUT 69 YEARS, OCC HOUSE WIFE, R/O DOOR NO. 9-11-97, ELWINPET, NEAR AMBEDKAR STATUE, NOOKALAMMA STREET GANDHINAGAR, KAKINADA, KAKINADA DISTRICT. ...PETITIONER AND 1. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, MUNICIPAL ADMINISTRATION AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT, VELAGAPUDI, AMARAVATI, GUNTUR DISTRICT. 2. THE KAKINADA MUNICIPAL CORPORATION, REPRESENTED BY ITS COMMISSIONER, KAKINADA, KAKINADA DISTRICT. 3. THE DEPUTY CITY PLANNING OFFICER, KAKINADA MUNICIPAL CORPORATION, KAKINADA, KAKINADA DISTRICT. 4. NAKKA JYOTHIPRABHA, D/O. LATE NOOKA RAJU, AGED 40 YEARS, R/O. DOOR NO. 9-11-94, ELWINPET, GANDHINAGAR, KAKINADA. ...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 to issue a writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of WRIT OF MANDAMUS declaring the action of respondents 2 and 3 in not 2 initiating effective action to prevent/remove the illegal construction at Door No. 9-11-94 being under taken by 4th respondent by encroaching the public passage towards eastern side of petitioners house bearing Door No. 9-11-97, plot No.23 covered by Survey Number 710/1 situate at Elwinpet, Gandhinagar area, Kakinada, and also failing to enforce provisional notice No. 01/1060/KKD/UC/2025 dated 14.08.2025 issued under Sections 452(1), 461(1) r/w 428, 429 of APMC Act 1955 and Section 89(1 and2) r/w Section 82, 90(1) of APMR and UDA Act 2016, by not issuing confirmation order, demolishing unauthorized G1 construction, and removing encroachment on public passage by 4th respondent, as illegal, irregular, irrational, amounts to non discharge of legal obligation conferred on respondents 1 to 3 under the provisions of Andhra Pradesh Municipalities Act, 1965 and rules framed there under and offends Article 14 of Constitution of India and consequently direct the respondents 1 to 3 to initiate action for prevention of said illegal construction being under taken by 4th respondent and for removal of already constructed illegal and unauthorized portion thereof and pass IA NO: 1 OF 2025 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 to direct the respondents 1 to 3 to prevent illegal construction being carried out by 4th respondent at Door No. 9-11-94 by encroaching the public passage towards eastern side of petitioner’s house bearing plot No.23 covered by Survey Number 710/1 situate at Elwinpet, Gandhinagar area, Kakinada and consequently direct the respondents to remove already constructed illegal and unauthorized portion thereof, pending disposal of the main Writ Petition, and pass Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. KONDEPUDI RAJABABU Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. GP MUNCIPAL ADMN AND URBAN DEV AP The Court made the following: 3 Order:- The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the 4th respondent has taken up unauthorized construction and has also trespassed into the passage between the petitioner’s property and the 4th respondent’s property. 2. The learned Standing Counsel appearing for respondent Nos. 2 and 3, on written instructions, submits that after receipt of the complaint from the petitioner, the respondent authorities issued a provisional notice dated 14.08.2025 and a confirmation order dated 20.09.2025. It is also submitted that the passage referred to by the petitioner is not a public passage but a private joint lane belonging to the petitioner and the 4th respondent, and as such, the allegation of encroachment on the public passage is denied by respondent Nos. 2 and 3. It is submitted that, insofar as the unauthorized construction is concerned, respondent Nos. 2 and 3 have already initiated the requisite action. 3. Considering the submissions and the written instructions of the learned Standing Counsel appearing for respondent Nos. 2 and 3, the writ petition is disposed of at the admission stage, leaving it open for respondent Nos. 2 and 3 to take steps in accordance with law, in the event there is any encroachment by the 4th respondent on the public road. There shall be no order as to costs. 4. Pending miscellaneous petitions, if any, shall stand closed. ____________________ JUSTICE HARINATH.N 20.12.2025 PNS