APHC010541422025 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 WRIT PETITION NO: 27940/2025 Between: 1. ABDUL MOYEED,, S/O ABDUL HAMEED, AGED ABOUT 58 YEARS, D.NO.21-45-8, ASSIPAPA VEEDHI, CHURCH, CHANGALRAO PETA, VISAKHAPATNAM URBAN, VISAKHAPATNAM, ANDHRA PRADESH- 530 001. 2. HUSNARA BEGUM,, W/O ABDUL MOYEED, AGED ABOUT 54 YEARS, D.NO.21-45-8, ASSIPAPA VEEDHI, CHURCH, CHANGALRAO PETA, VISAKHAPATNAM URBAN, VISAKHAPATNAM, ANDHRA PRADESH- 530 001. 3. ABDUL KALAM,, S/O ABDUL MOYEED, AGED ABOUT 35 YEARS, D.NO.20-74-9, ASSIPAPA STREET, A.V.N COLLEGE, CHANGALRAO PETA, VISAKHAPATNAM, URBAN, VISAKHAPATNAM, ANDHRA PRADESH- 530 001. 4. ABDUL WAFA,, S/O ABDUL MOYEED, AGED ABOUT 33 YEARS, D.NO.20-74-9, ASSIPAPA STREET, A.V.N COLLEGE, CHANGALRAO PETA, VISAKHAPATNAM, URBAN, VISAKHAPATNAM, ANDHRA PRADESH- 530 001. ...PETITIONER(S) AND 1. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REPRESENTED BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY MUNICIPAL ADMINISTRATION, AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT AP SECRETRIAT BUILDINGS VELAGAPUDI AMARAVATI GUNTUR DISTRICT. 2. THE GREATER VISAKHAPATNAM MUNICIPAL CORPORATION, REPRESENTED BY ITS COMMISSIONER TENNETI VISWANADHAM BHAWAN ASEELMETTA JUNCTION RAMNAGAR VISAKHAPATNAM. 3. THE CHIEF CITY PLANNER, GREATER VISAKHAPATNAM MUNICIPAL CORPORATION TENNETI VISWANADHAM BHAWAN ASEELMETTA JUNCTION RAMNAGAR VISAKHAPATNAM. 4. THE ASSISTANT CITY PLANNER, ZONE 111 ASEELMETTA JUNCTION GREATER VISAKHAPATNAM MUNICIPAL CORPORATION VISAKHAPATNAM. 5. THE ZONAL COMMISSIONER, ZONES GREATER VISAKHAPATNAM MUNICIPAL CORPORATION AKHILA ARCADE RAMA TALKIES RD ASILMETTA VISAKHAPATNAM. ...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 and appropriate order or direction more particularly one in Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the respondents 2 to 5, in issuing the show cause notice under Section 452 of the Andhra Pradesh Municipal Corporation Act, 1955, and in interfering with the lawful construction being undertaken by the petitioners in Plot No.11, L.P.No. 138/1961, S.NO.1032/2B of Waltair Ward, Visakhapatnam, as illegal, arbitrary, high-handed,ultra-virus, and against to the principles of natural justice and contrary to law, besides being violative of Articles 13, 19(g) and 300A of the Constitution of Indiaand violative of the principles of natural justice and consequently direct the respondents not to take any coercive steps, such as demolition, removal of pillars, or stoppage of construction, in respect of the petitioners property covered under the duly approved building plan bearing B.A.No.1086/3137/B/Z4/RAR/2024 dated 04.09.2025 situated in Plot No.11, L.P.No.138/1961, S.No.1032/2B of Waltair Ward, Visakhapatnam, without following the due process of law 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 direct the respondents not to interfere with the construction activity being carried by the petitioner as per the approved planout B.A.No.1086/3137/B/Z4/RAR/2024 dated 04.09.2025 situated in Plot No.11, L.P.No.138/1961, S.No.1032/2B of Waltair Ward, Visakhapatnam in any manner, pending disposal of the above writ petition in the interests of justice, pending disposal of the above writ petition Counsel for the Petitioner(S): 1. CHALLA AJAY KUMAR Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. GP MUNCIPAL ADMN AND URBAN DEV AP The Court made the following: THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE HARINATH.N WRIT PETITION No.27940 of 2025 ORDER: 1. The petitioner is aggrieved by the unilateral action of the respondents in coming over to the property and holding out threats of demolition. 2. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the 2nd respondent issued show cause notice on 29.09.2025 for which the petitioner submitted an explanation on 06.10.2025. It is submitted that the 2nd respondent would have to pass an order duly considering the explanation of the petitioner, however, the 2nd respondent has been sending its men holding out threats of demolition. 3. The learned standing counsel for the 2nd respondent submits that the petitioner’s construction was initially taken up with any deviation of the sanctioned plan and on 18.07.2025 the respondent authorities rectified the setback deviation. Thereafter, the petitioner started the construction by obtaining the revised permission on 04.09.2025 and started reconstruction along with deviation. 4. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that there are no deviations as alleged by the learned standing counsel for the 2nd respondent. 5. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned standing counsel for the 2nd respondent. Peruse the material on record. 6. Be that as it may, the 2nd respondent is directed to pass appropriate orders duly taking into consideration reply submitted by the petitioner on 06.10.2025, in the meanwhile, a direction to the petitioner also not to take any further construction in deviation of the plan. 7. Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed off without costs. As a sequel miscellaneous application, pending, if any, shall also stand closed. ____________________ JUSTICE HARINATH.N Date: 09.10.2025 KGM 72 THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE HARINATH.N WRIT PETITION No.27940 of 2025 Date: 09.10.2025 KGM