APHC010129882022 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3457] THURSDAY,THE NINTH DAY OF OCTOBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE HARINATH.N WRIT PETITION NO: 7282/2022 Between: 1. KAMBHAMPATI RAMA MOHAN RAO, S/O.K.CHINNA KANNAYYA, AGED ABOUT 64 YEARS, R/O. H.NO.6C,8-2, DIVISION 12, NEAR JAIN TEMPLE, SOUTHERN STREET,ELURU WEST GODAVARI. 2. KONAKALLA. NARAYANARAO, S/O. (LATE)KOMAKALLA SUBBARAO, AGED ABOUT 56 YEARS, R/O.6D-10-4 SOUTHERN STREET MASEEDU ROAD KATTHEPU VEEDHI, ELURU, WEST GODAVARI. 3. DUNNA VENKATA RAM PRASAD, S/O. VENKATESWARA RAO, AGED ABOUT 41 YEARS, R/O.4-11-9/1 KRISHNA SAI NILAYAM, DAM RAJU STREET, OPP K.B.R.HOSPITAL, AGRAHARAM, ELURU, WEST GODAVARI. 4. PADARTHI BALA VENKATA RAVI KUMAR, S/O. P. VEKATA SUBBARA, AGED ABOUT 44 YEARS, R/O.PLOT NO.518, VAIBHAV FORT, AGRRAHARAM, OPP.BSNL OFFICE, BESIDE KASTURI BAI HIGH SCHOOL, WESTERN STREET, VTC, ELURU WEST GODAVARI. 5. GADDAMSETTI VENKATESHWARA RAO, S/O.G. VENKATESHWARA RAO, AGED ABOUT 65 YEARS, R/O. H.NO.6A-9-17, SOUTHERN STREET, NEAR ASHOK CHAKRAM, ELURU, WEST GODAVARI. 6. BOYINA DHANALAKSHMI, W/O. BOYINA KEDESWARUDU, AGED ABOUT 47 YEARS, R/O. H.NO.1-58, MALLAVARAM, CHETTUNAPADU, BHIMADOLE WEST GODAVARI. 2 7. VENGUTA RAMA KRISHNA RAO, SIB. V. VENKATESHWARA RAO AGED ABOUT 60 YEARS, R/O.24V-18-6, MUKKUTIMMANA STREET, ASHOK NAGAR, NEAR GANGANAMMA TEMPLE, ELURU, WEST GODAVARI. _ 8. B. KUMAR SAI, S/O. AGED ABOUT 27 YEARS, R/O.D.NO.7B-12-32, EASTERN STREET, ELURU, WEST GODAVARI 9. G. SRINIVAS, S/O.MADHUSUDAN RAO, AGED ABOUT 32YEARS, R/O. D.NO.3B-4-1 BOMMALAGUDI ROAD, JANAKI VEEDI, ELURU, WEST GODAVARI. ...PETITIONER(S) AND 1. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF MUNICIPAL ADMINISTRATION AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT SECRETARIAT BUILDINGS, VELAGAPUDI, AMARAVATI, GUNTUR DISTRICT. 2. THE ELURU MUNICIPAL CORPORATION, REP.BY ITS COMMISSIONER, ELLURU, WEST GODAVARI 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 tomay be pleased to issue a Writ, Order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaringthe action of the 2nd respondent in trying to block/close the 15 ft. wide road situated in Old T.S.No.42, New T.S.No.1820,1821 of ,Erstwhile Gopala Krishna talkies, Agraharam, Eluru, west godavari district without causing any notice to the petitioners or having any reason for blocking the road as illegal,arbitrary, unconstitutional and violation of principles of natural justice, article 300-A of constitution of india and consequently direct the 2nd 'respondent to not to interfere with the right of ingress and egress of petitioners into the 15ft. wide road situated in Old R.S.No.42, New T.S.No.1820, 1821 of Erstwhile Gopala Krishna talkies, Agraharam, Eluru, West Godavari District and pass such IA NO: 1 OF 2022 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 3 may be pleased to direct the 2nd respondent to not to block/close the 15ft. wide road situated in Old 111R.S.No.42, New T.S.No.1820,1821 of erstwhile Gopala Krishna talkies, Agraharam, Eluru, West Godavari District, pending disposal of the above writ petition and pass such Counsel for the Petitioner(S): 1. PILLIX LAW FIRM Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. M MANOHAR REDDY (SC FOR MUNC AND MUNC CORP ) 2. GP FOR MUNCIPAL ADMN URBAN DEV The Court made the following: 4 ORDER:- The Writ Petition was filed, aggrieved by the action of the 2nd respondent in trying to block/close the 15 feet wide road situated in old T.S.No.42, new T.S.No.1820, 1821 of erstwhile Gopala Krishna Talkies, Agraharam, Eluru. It is submitted that the said action was preventing the ingress and egress of the petitioners over the said passage. 2. The learned Standing Counsel appearing for the 2nd respondent, on written instructions, submits that as on date, the passage is open and the commuters are using the said 15 feet passage. 3. Considering the 15 feet passage lies within private land belonging to the petitioners and others, in the event, the 2nd respondent seeks to acquire the same for a public purpose, the provisions of the “Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013 to be followed. 4. Recording the same, the Writ Petition is closed. No order as to costs. Pending miscellaneous petitions, if any, shall stand closed. ____________________ JUSTICE HARINATH.N Dt: 09.10.2025 SR