APHC010131922023 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3332] WEDNESDAY,THE FIFTH DAY OF NOVEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE RAVI CHEEMALAPATI WRIT PETITION NO: 6653/2023 Between: 1. SRI VIJAYALAKSHMI GOWDA KULA SAMKSHEMA SANGHAM, (REGD. NO.185/2012), GUDLAVALLERU-521356, GUDLAVALLERU MANDAL, KRISHNA DISTRICT, REP. BY ITS PRESIDENT. PALAGANI VENKATESWARA RAO, S/O SREERAMULU, AGED ABOUT 63 YEARS, R/O DR.NO.8-232, GUDLAVALLERU VILLAGE AND MANDAL, KRISHNA DISTRICT. ...PETITIONER AND 1. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REPRESENTED BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, PANCHAYAT RAJ DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT BUILDINGS, VELAGAPUDI, AMARAVATI, GUNTUR DISTRICT. 2. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, KRISHNA DISTRICT, AT CHILAKALAPUDI, MACHILIPATNAM, KRISHNA DISTRICT. 3. THE TAHSILDAR, GUDLAVALLERU MANDAL, GUDLAVALLERU- 521356, KRISHNA DISTRICT. 4. THE GUDLAVALLERU GRAM PANCHAYAT, REP BY ITS SECRETARY, GUDLAVALLERU-521356, KRISHNA DISTRICT. 5. KUNCHAPARTHI VENKATESWARA RAO, S/O PANDURANGA RAO, AGED ABOUT 64 YEARS, CC. BUSINESS, R/O DR.NOS.2/71 A 2/72. GUDLAVALLERU VILLAGE ET MANDAL, KRISHNA DISTRICT. 6. KUNCHAPARTHI JAYA RAM, S/O PANDURANGA RAO, AGED ABOUT 56 YEARS, OCC. BUSINESS, R/O DR.NOS.2/72 ET 2/73, GUDLAVALLERU (V) 8T (M), KRISHNA DIST., 7. KANTETI NAGA VENKATA SATYA VARA PRASAD, , S/O RATNAGIRI RAO, AGED ABOUT 59 YEARS, OCC. BUSINESS, R/O DR.NO.2/70 A 2/70-1, GUDLAVALLERU (V) 8 (M),KRISHNA 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 to issue the Writ, Order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus to direct the Respondents 2 to 4 to demolish the illegal constructed Asbestos sheds/shops by Respondents 5 to 7 on the Panchayat Road in Sy.No.216/12A of Gudlavalleru Village and Mandal, Krishna District in accordance with law by restoring the old Panchayat road for the convenience of general public as well as devotees of Vinayaka Temple and pass such 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 to directing the 4th Respondents to take action on the representation of the Petitioner dt.12-9-2022 in accordance with law, pending disposal of the Writ Petition; and to pass such Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. K RAMA KOTESWARA RAO Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. GP FOR FINANCE PLANNING 2. GP FOR REVENUE 3. GP FOR PANCHAYAT RAJ RURAL DEV 4. P RAVIKANTH 5. N SRIHARI (Standing Counsel for ZPP MPP and GRAM PANCHAYAT) The Court made the following: ORDER: Aggrieved by the inaction of respondent Nos.2 to 4 in taking action in demolishing the illegally constructed asbestos sheds/shops of the respondent Nos.5 to 7 on the Panchayat Road in Sy.No.216/12A of Gudlavalleru Village and Mandal, Krishna District, in accordance with law by restoring the old Panchayat road for the convenience of general public as well as devotees of Vinayaka Temple, the present writ petition is filed. 2. Heard Sri Borra Naganjaneyulu, learned counsel for the petitioner, Sri Y.Koteswara Rao, learned Standing Counsel for Gram Panchayat, Smt.Naga Chandrika, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Panchayat Raj, Sri V.Satya Narayana, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue and Sri P.Ravi Kanth, learned counsel for respondent No.6. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner while reiterating the contents of the affidavit contended that the petitioner made a representation dated 12.09.2022 to the respondent authority concerned in Spandana bringing to the notice of the authorities about the illegal encroachments made by respondent Nos.5 to 7 in the subject land. However, no action has been initiated by the respondent authorities against the same so far. He further submitted that it would suffice for the time being if a direction is given to the respondents to take steps on the petitioner’s representation in accordance with law, accordingly, prayed to pass appropriate orders. 3. On the other hand, learned counsel for respondent Nos.5 to 7 submitted that the petitioner is an encroacher and the unofficial respondents are not encroachers. The writ petition is devoid of merits and liable to be dismissed, accordingly, prayed to dismiss the writ petition. 4. Learned Standing Counsel for Gram Panchayat on instructions contended that pursuant to the representation made by the petitioner, survey has been conducted and several encroachments have been identified on the road margin and they would take steps in accordance with law, accordingly, prayed to dismiss the writ petition. 5. Taking their submissions into consideration, as the authorities have an intention to take steps in accordance with law, there is no purpose in keeping the writ petition pending inviting counter, as such, this Court is inclined to dispose of the writ petition by passing the following order: “The respondents are directed to remove the encroachments if any found on the road margin in the subject land by giving proper notices to all the parties concerned including the petitioner inviting explanation and an opportunity of being heard and pass reasoned order as expeditiously as possible within a period of three (03) months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.” 6. Accordingly, the Writ Petition is disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs. As a sequel, miscellaneous applications, pending if any, shall stand closed. _____________________________ JUSTICE RAVI CHEEMALAPATI Date: 05th November, 2025 RKS