APHC010004282023 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3332] TUESDAY, THE FOURTH DAY OF NOVEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE RAVI CHEEMALAPATI WRIT PETITION NO: 323/2023 Between: 1. TUMMALA SANTHI BHUSHANAM, S/O T.VEERASWAMI AGED ABOUT 56 YEARS, R/O H.NO.13-130, PEDALINGAMPADU VILLAGE, BHIMADOLE MANDAL, ELURU DISTRICT (OLD WEST GODAVARI), ANDHRA PRADESH - 534 425. ...PETITIONER AND 1. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REPRESENTED BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY PANCHAYAT RAJ AND RURAL DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT, NELAPADU, AMARAVATI, GUNTUR DISTRICT. 2. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, ELURU DISTRICT (OLD WEST GODAVARI), COLLECTORATE, ELURU. 3. THE REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER, ELURU, COLLECTORATE, ELURU. 4. THE TAHSILDAR, BHIMADOLE MANDAL, ELURU DISTRICT. 2 5. THE BHIMADOLE GRAMA PANCHAYAT, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, PANCHAYAT OFFICE, BHIMADOLE, ELURU DISTRICT. 6. THE ELURU URBAN DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY, (EUDA) REPRESENTED BY ITS VICE CHAIRMAN (COMPETENT AUTHORITY), ELURU, ELURU DISTRICT. 7. VARDHINEEDI SATHYA SAI, S/O NOT KNOWN, AGED ABOUT 54 YEARS, OCC. EMPLOYEE, R/O BHIMADOLE, ELURU 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 an appropriate writ, order or direction, more particularly, one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus, declaring the inaction of the Respondent Authorities in not taking any action including by penalising and removing the unauthorised and illegal constructions (Satya Sai Temple) being raised by the Seventh Respondent in land ad- measuring Ac.0-05 Cents situated in RS.No.91-2A1 (91-2A) of Bhimadole Village and Mandal, Eluru District (West Godavari District) (classified as Tank Poramboke) despite the Petitioners Spandana Complaint Nos.WEG202202272535 dated 27/12/2021 and WEG202202281752 dated 28/02/2022 and the Endorsement issued by the Third Respondent (RDO) vide Rc.No.02/2022 (DT) dated 18/02/2022 as illegal, arbitrary and violative of principles of natural justice and the provisions of the Andhra Pradesh Metropolitan Region and Urban Development Authorities Act, 2016, Andhra Pradesh Panchayat Raj Act, 1994, the Andhra Pradesh Building Rules, 2017 (G.O.MS.No.119 Panchayat Raj and Rural Development (Pts.IV) Department, dated 28/03/2017), the Andhra Pradesh Gram Panchayats (Protection of Property) Rules, 2011 (G.O.Ms.No.188, Panchayat Raj and Rural Development (Pts.IV) Department, dated 21/07/2011) and Articles 14, 19(g), 21 of the Constitution of India and 3 consequently to direct the Respondent Authorities to forthwith remove the illegal/unauthorised building (Satya Sai Temple) in the Tank Poramboke and to 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 Respondent Authorities not to permit the Seventh Respondent to occupy or allow any other person to occupy the illegal/unauthorised building (Satya Sai Temple) in land ad- measuring Ac.0-05 Cents situated in RS.No.91-2A1 (91¬2A), Bhimadole Village and Mandal, Eluru District (West Godavari District), Andhra Pradesh pending disposal of the Writ Petition pending disposal of the above writ petition and to pass IA NO: 2 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 Seventh Respondent not to make any further constructions including finishing works to the illegal/unauthorised building (Satya Sai Temple) in land ad-measuring Ac.O-05 Cents situated in RS.No.91-2A1 (91-2A), Bhimadole Village and Mandal, Eluru District (West Godavari District), Andhra Pradesh and to 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 Pleased to grant leave to the Respondent No.6 to file Counter Affidavit and to pass Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. M R K CHAKRAVARTHY Counsel for the Respondent(S): 4 1. SOMA RAJU YELISETTI 2. GP FOR REVENUE 3. GP FOR PANCHAYAT RAJ RURAL DEV 4. N SRIHARI (Standing Counsel for MPP ZPP and GRAM PANCHAYAT) The Court made the following ORDER: Declaring the inaction of the respondent authorities in taking any action against the unauthorized and illegal construction (Satya Sai Temple) being raised by the 7th respondent in land to an extent of Ac.0.05 cents situated in RS.No.91-2A of Bhimadole Village and Mandal, Eluru District, which is classified as Tank Poramboke, despite the petitioner‟s complaints dated 27.12.2021, 28.02.2022 & 18.02.2022 and the endorsement of the 3rd respondent-Revenue Divisional Officer dated 18.02.2022, as illegal and arbitrary, the present writ petition is filed. 2. Heard Sri MRK. Chakravarthy, learned counsel for the petitioner, Sri Y. Koteswara Rao, learned Standing Counsel for Gram Panchayat and Ms. Naga Chandrika, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Panchayat Raj and learned Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue. 5 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner, in elaboration to what has been stated in the affidavit, submitted that the petitioner is the resident of Pedalingampadu Village, Bhimadole Mandal, Eluru District (West Godavari) and that the unofficial respondents have encroached the water tank government poramboke site admeasuring 200 Sq. yards in R.S.No.91/2A1 and illegally constructed Sri Satya Sai Temple without obtaining any permission and they have also encroached prohibited ground portion of the overhead tank and erected the statue of God. He further submitted that in spite of making complaints dated 27.12.2021, 28.02.2022 & 18.02.2022, the authorities have not acted upon. He further submitted that it would suffice for the time being, if a direction is given to the respondent authorities to take steps against the illegal constructions so made, in accordance with law. 4. Learned Assistant Government Pleader and learned Standing Counsel, collectively sought time to file counter affidavit. 5. Perused the record and considered the submissions made by the parties. 6. It is not in dispute that the subject land is classified as Government land and sub-classified as „tank‟ and on the bund of said tank, a temple in the name of Sri Satya Sai Temple was 6 constructed without obtaining any permission from the authority concerned. Despite the petitioner‟s submitting several complaints and despite the specific direction issued by this Court on 04.01.2023 directing respondent Nos.2 to 6 to consider the 3rd respondent endorsement dated 18.02.2022 and take appropriate action, the authorities have not taken any action. This matter pertains to the year 2023 and though two years have lapsed, the respondent authorities have neither filed the counter affidavit nor brought any instructions to this Court. 7. In view of the facts and circumstances of the case, there is no purpose in keeping the writ petition pending inviting counter affidavit. As no positive orders are being passed affecting the rights of the 7th respondent, issuance of notice to him is hereby dispensed with. As such, this Court is inclined to dispose of the writ petition by passing the following order: “The respondent authorities concerned are directed to look into the grievance raised by the petitioner and if any illegal encroachments are found in the land classified as tank as alleged by the petitioner, they shall take steps in accordance with law. 7 The said exercise shall be completed within a period of three (03) months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.” 8. Accordingly, the Writ Petition is disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs. As a sequel thereto, interlocutory applications pending, if any in the Writ Petition, shall also stand closed. ____________________________ JUSTICE RAVI CHEEMALAPATI Date: 04.11.2025 ANS 8 292 THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE RAVI CHEEMALAPATI WRIT PETITION NO: 323/2023 Date: 04.11.2025 ANS