Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Andhra Pradesh · body

2025 DAILYLAW 56447 (AP)

Gopi Balakrishna, v. State of Andhra Pradesh,

WP/2077/2021 · 2025-10-06

Venkata Jyothirmai Pratapa

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

APHC010029652021 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3396] TUESDAY,THE SEVENTH DAY OF OCTOBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA WRIT PETITION NO: 2077/2021 Between: 1. GOPI BALAKRISHNA,, S/O. SUBBA RAO, AGED 44 YEARS, OCC BUSINESS, R/O. D.NO.5-115, N.G.O.'S COLONY, 3RD LINE, KURNOOL ROAD, ONGOLE CITY, PRAKASAM DISTRICT. 2. GOPI RAMAKRISHNA,, S/O. SUBBA RAO, AGED 37 YEARS, OCC BUSINESS, R/O. D.NO.5-115, N.G.O.'S COLONY, 3RD LINE, KURNOOL ROAD, ONGOLE CITY, PRAKASAM DISTRICT. ...PETITIONER(S) AND 1. STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, HOME DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT, VELAGAPUDI, AMARAVATI, GUNTUR DISTRICT. 2. SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, PRAKASAM DISTRICT AT ONGOLE. 3. INSPECTOR OF POLICE, ONGOLE TALUKA POLICE CIRCLE, ONGOLE CITY, PRAKASAM DISTRICT. 4. STATION HOUSE OFFICER, ONGOLE TALUKA POLICE STATION, ONGOLE, PRAKASAM DISTRICT. 5. ONGOLE VENKATA SUBBA RAO, S/O VENKATA KRISHNA MANIKYALA RAO AGE 45 YEARS, R/O SRIGIRI TOWERS, ONGOLE, PRAKASAM 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 a writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of WRIT OF MANDAMUS declaring the action of respondents, particularly 3rd respondent in interfering with the petitioners' construction of 2 shop and compound wall there around their site covered by Survey Number Sy. No138/3 of Ongole Municipal Corporation Limits and insisting them to yield to the terms of 5th respondent, as illegal, irregular, arbitrary, unjust, without any authority of law and offends Articles 14 and 21 of Constitution of India and consequently direct the respondents not to interfere in any manner with the petitioners possession and structures over their said site property nor interfere with their personal liberty and properties and pass IA NO: 1 OF 2021 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 and 4 not to insist the petitioners to appear before their authority nor interfere with the petitioners’ construction of shop and compound wall there around their site covered by Survey Number Sy. No: 138/3 of Ongole Municipal Corporation Limits, pending disposal of the main Writ Petition and to pass Counsel for the Petitioner(S): 1. NIMMAGADDA REVATHI Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. GP FOR HOME The Court made the following: 3 THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA WRIT PETITION NO: 2077 of 2021 ORDER: This Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of Constitution of India with the following prayer for: “…to issue a writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of WRIT OF MANDAMUS declaring the action of respondents particularly 3rd respondent in interfering with the petitioners’ construction of shop and compound wall there around their site covered by Survey Number Sy.No.138/3 of Ongole Municipal Corporation Limits and insisting them to yield to the terms of 5th respondent as illegal, irregular, arbitrary, unjust, without any authority of law and offends Articles 14 and 21 of Constitution of India and consequently direct the respondents not to interfere in any manner with the petitioners’ possession and structures over their said site property nor interfere with their personal liberty and properties …” 2. When the matter is taken up for hearing, Sri V.Farooq, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Home would submit that in the light of the interim order passed by this Court vide Order dated 29.01.2021, the respondent- police are not interfering in the civil disputes between the petitioners and unofficial respondent. 3. Ms. Nimmagadda Revathi, learned counsel for the petitioners would submit that recording the same, the petition may be disposed of. 4. In that view of the matter, this Writ Petition is disposed of making the interim order as absolute. There shall be no order as to costs. 4 As a sequel thereto, miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shall stand closed. _________________________________________ Dr. JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA Date: 07.10.2025. VNS 5 HON’BLE DR. JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA W.P.No. 2077 of 2021 Dated.07.10.2025 VNS 718