APHC010209302023 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH MONDAY,THE FIRST DAY OF DECEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE RAVI CHEEMALAPATI WRIT PETITION NO: 10835/2023 Between: 1. K LAKSHMAIAH, S/O K.SUBBARAYUDU, R/O KAKKALAPALLI VILLAGE, ANANTAPUR MANDAL, ANANTAPUR DIST. 1. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REPRESENTED BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, PANCHAYATRAJ DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT, VELAGAPUDI, 2. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, ANANTAPUR, ANANTAPUR DIST, 3. THE DISTRICT PANCHAYAT OFFICER, ANANTAPUR, ANANTAPUR DIST. 4. THE MANDAL PARISHAD DEVELOPMENT OFFICER, ANANTAPUR, ANANTAPUR DIST. 5. THE VILLAGE SECRETARY, KAKKALAPALLI VILLA MANDAL AND DIST. 6. K CHINNA PEDDI REDDY, S/O K.RAMAPPA, R/O KATTAKINDAPALLI, ANANTAPUR MANDAL AND ANANTAPUR DIST. 7. B THIPPAREDDY, S/O ASWARTHA REDDY, R/O KATTAKINDAPALLI, ANANTAPUR MANDAL AND ANANTAPUR DIST. 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 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) MONDAY,THE FIRST DAY OF DECEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE RAVI CHEEMALAPATI WRIT PETITION NO: 10835/2023 K LAKSHMAIAH, S/O K.SUBBARAYUDU, R/O KAKKALAPALLI VILLAGE, ANANTAPUR MANDAL, ANANTAPUR DIST. ...PETITIONER AND THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REPRESENTED BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, PANCHAYATRAJ DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT, VELAGAPUDI, GUNTUR DISTRICT. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, ANANTAPUR, ANANTAPUR DIST, THE DISTRICT PANCHAYAT OFFICER, ANANTAPUR, ANANTAPUR THE MANDAL PARISHAD DEVELOPMENT OFFICER, ANANTAPUR, ANANTAPUR DIST. THE VILLAGE SECRETARY, KAKKALAPALLI VILLAGE, ANANTAPUR MANDAL AND DIST. K CHINNA PEDDI REDDY, S/O K.RAMAPPA, R/O KATTAKINDAPALLI, ANANTAPUR MANDAL AND ANANTAPUR DIST. B THIPPAREDDY, S/O ASWARTHA REDDY, R/O KATTAKINDAPALLI, ANANTAPUR MANDAL AND ANANTAPUR DIST. ...RESPONDENT(S): etition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH [3332] MONDAY,THE FIRST DAY OF DECEMBER THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE RAVI CHEEMALAPATI K LAKSHMAIAH, S/O K.SUBBARAYUDU, R/O KAKKALAPALLI ...PETITIONER THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REPRESENTED BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, PANCHAYATRAJ DEPARTMENT, THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, ANANTAPUR, ANANTAPUR DIST, THE DISTRICT PANCHAYAT OFFICER, ANANTAPUR, ANANTAPUR THE MANDAL PARISHAD DEVELOPMENT OFFICER, ANANTAPUR, GE, ANANTAPUR K CHINNA PEDDI REDDY, S/O K.RAMAPPA, R/O KATTAKINDAPALLI, ANANTAPUR MANDAL AND ANANTAPUR DIST. B THIPPAREDDY, S/O ASWARTHA REDDY, R/O KATTAKINDAPALLI, ...RESPONDENT(S): etition 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 a Writ or Order or Direction more particularly in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the in action of the respondents 2 to 5 in taking action against respondents 6 and 7 for encroaching land of village panchayat which leads way from Kakkalapalli village to Sanapa village is illegal arbitrary and violation of the principles of natural justice and consequently restore the same to the village panchayat 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 2 to 5 to take steps to recover the panchayat land of Kakkalaplli village which leads way from Kakkalapalli village to Sanapa village and pass Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. M KARIBASAIAH Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. VENKATA REDDY GAJJALA SC FOR ZPP, MPP, AND GRAM PANCHAYAT 2. GP FOR PANCHAYAT RAJ RURAL DEV The Court made the following: ORDER This writ petition is filed questioning inaction of respondent nos. 2 to 5 in taking action against respondent nos. 6 and 7 for encroaching the land of village Panchayat which leads way from Kakkalapalli to Sanapa Village. 2. At para No.4 of the counter affidavit filed by respondent nos. 4 and 5, it was stated that the authorities visited the subject layout and removed 25 feet width layout towards rasta and the developers also did not raise any objection and the respondents would take further course of action in accordance with the procedure established by law. 3. Sri M.Karibasaiah, learned counsel for the petitioner, prayed this court to close the writ petition recording the contents of the counter affidavit. 4. In view of the above, since the authorities in the counter affidavit stated that the encroachments were removed and further they would take further course of action in accordance with law and as the learned counsel for the petitioner prayed to close the writ petition recording the contents of the written instructions, this writ petition is closed. 5. Accordingly, the writ petition is closed. There shall be no order as to costs. Pending miscellaneous petitions, if any, shall stand closed. ____________________________ JUSTICE RAVI CHEEMALAPATI Dated: 1st December, 2025. RR