Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Andhra Pradesh · body

2025 DAILYLAW 59516 (AP)

PADALA LACCHA REDDY v. THE STATE OF AP

WP/34631/2025 · 2025-12-29

D Ramesh

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

APHC010671252025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3208] TUESDAY, THE THIRTIETH DAY OF DECEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE D RAMESH WRIT PETITION NO: 34631/2025 Between: 1. PADALA LACCHA REDDY, S/O. RAMA REDDY AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS, OCC CULTIVATION, R/O. 2-108, PADALA VARI VEEDHI, VELAGALERU, PENUMANTRA MANDAL, WEST GODAVARI DISTRICT. 2 2. PADALA VENKATA RATNA REDDY, S/O. SRIRAMA REDDY, AGED ABOUT 67 YEARS, OCC CULTIVATION, R/O. 2-111, MURUGU KALUVA GATTU, VELAGALERU VILLAGE, PENUMANTRA VILLAGE WEST GODAVARI DISTRICT. 3. L 3. SATTI MAHALAKSHMI, W/O. NAGI REDDY AGED ABOUT 59 YEARS, OCC CULTIVATION, R/O. 6-80A, PALLAPU VEEDHI, PENUMANTRA WEST GODAVARI DISTRICT. 4. PADALA VARALAKSHMI, W/O. SATYANARAYANA REDDY AGED ABOUT 72 YEARS, OCC CULTIVATION R/O. 2-111,PADALA VARI VEEDHI, VELAGALERU, PENUMANTRA MANDAL. 5. VELAGALA SATTI REDDY, S/O. ACCHI REDDY AGED ABOUT 60 YEARS, OCC CULTIVATION R/O. 3-131/2, MARTERU,PENUMANTRAMANDA ...PETITIONER(S) AND 1. THE STATE OF AP, REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, REVENUE DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT, VELAGAPUDI. 2. 2. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, WEST GODAVARI DISTRICT. BHIMAVARAM. 3. 3. THE MANDAL REVENUE OFFICER, PENUGONDA MANDAL, PENUGONDA 4. 4. THE MANDAL REVENUE OFFICER, PENUMANTRA MANDAL, PENUMANTRA 5. 2 5. THE NEGGIPUDI GRAM PANCHAYAT, REPRESENTED BY ITS PANCHAYAT SECRETARY NEGGIPUDI VILLAGE, PENUMANTRA MANDAL. 6. 6. THE PENUGONDA GRAM PANCHAYAT, REPRESENTED BY ITS PANCHAYAT SECRETARY PENUGONDA VILLAGE, PENUGONDA MANDAL. ...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 a Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of Respondents 4 and 5 in proposing to establish a dumping yard in Sy.No. 150 of Neggipudi Village of Penumantra Mandal of West Godavari District classified as Muruga Kaluva (waste water channel), as illegal, arbitrary, and unconstitutional and consequently direct the Direct the Respondent authorities to not set up dumping yard in Sy.No.150 of Neggipudi Village of Penumantra Mandal of West Godavari District classified as Muruga Kaluva (water channel), and 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 direct the Respondents not to convert Sy.No. 150 of Neggipudi Village of Penumantra Mandal of West Godavari District which is classified as “Murugu Kaluva” for the purpose of dumping yard and any other order that this Hon’ble Court deems fit in the interest of justice. pass Counsel for the Petitioner(S): 1. N SIVA REDDY Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. GP FOR REVENUE 2. Y KOTESWARA RAO The Court made the following: 3 ORDER: The present Writ Petition is filed, under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, seeking the following relief: “to issue any writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus or an appropriate writ or order declaring the action of Respondents 4 and 5 in proposing to establish a dumping yard in Sy.No.150 of Neggipudi Village of Penumantra Mandal of West Godavari District classified as Muruga Kaluva (waste water channel), as illegal, arbitrary, and unconstitutional and consequently direct the Direct the Respondent authorities to not set up dumping yard in Sy.No.150 of Neggipudi Village of Penumantra Mandal of West Godavari District classified as Muruga Kaluva (water channel), and Pass….” 2. Heard M/s. N.Siva Reddy, learned counsel for the petitioners and learned Assistant Government Pleader appearing for respondents. 3. During the course of hearing, learned standing counsel appearing on behalf of respondent no.5, on instructions, has submitted that there is no such proposal for establishment of dumping yard in the subject land. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that by recording the said submissions of the learned standing counsel, the Writ Petition may be disposed of. 5. By recording the said submissions of the learned standing counsel appearing on behalf of respondent no.5, the Writ Petition is disposed of. No costs. 4 As a sequel thereto, interlocutory applications pending, if any, in the writ petition, shall also stand closed. ___________________ JUSTICE D.RAMESH 30.12.2025 RD 5 THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE D.RAMESH WRIT PETITION No.34631 of 2025 30.12.2025 RD