IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH :: AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) THURSDAY, THE TWENTIETH DAY OF FEBRUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE V.SUJATHA WRIT PETITION NO: 3157 OF 2025 Between: Bapatla Sridevi, W/o. BapatIa Venkata Rao, aged about 45 years, Occ. House Wife, R/o. Door.No. 39-1-3/1, Ramalayam Street, Gopalanagar, Ongole Town, Prakasam District. 2. Bapatla Venkatrao, S/o. Late Venkateswarlu Aged about 50 years, Occ. coolie R/o. Door.No. 39-1-3/1, Ramalayam Street, Gopalanagar, Ongole Town, Prakasam District. 1. ...Petitioners AND 1. The State of Andhra Pradesh, Represented by It's Principal Secretary, MA and UD Department, Secretariat, Velagapudi, Amaravathi,Guntur Dist. 2. The Commissioner and Director of Municipal Administration, Prime Hill Crest, 4th Floor, Vaddeswaram, Guntur District. 3. The Ongole Municipal Corporation, Rep by its Commissioner, Governor Road, Jakrama Nagar, Ongole, Prakasam District. 4. The Tahsildar, Ongole, Prakasam District. 5. The Station House Officer, Gopal Nagar, Ongole, Prakasam district. 6. Bapatla Thirupathamma W/o Srinivasa Rao, Aged about 60 years, R/o Door No.39-1-3/2, Ramalayam Street, Gopalanagar, Ongole Town, Prakasam District. 7. Bapatla Brahmaiah, S/o Srinivasa Rao, Aged about 45 years, R/o Door No.39-1-3/2, Ramalayam Street, Gopalanagar, Ongole Town, Prakasam District. 8. Bapatla Nageswaramma W/o Subba Rao, Aged about 58 years, R/o Door No.39-1-3/3, Ramalayam Street, Gopalanagar, Ongole Town, Prakasam District. 9. Bapatla Venkateswarlu S/o Subba Rao, Aged about 40 years, R/o Door No.39-1-3/3, Ramalayam Street, Gopalanagar, Ongole Town, Prakasam District. (RR 6 to 9 are impleaded as per the Court's Order dt.17.02.2025 in I.A.No. 02 of 2025) ...Respondents 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 or order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action inaction of the respondents, especially 3rd respondent on my representation dated 18-01- 2025 despite receiving the same with regard to the construction of the house in Sy.No. 259 in violation to the principles laid down in Andhra Pradesh Municipal Corporation Act, 1995 and Andhra Pradesh Building Rules, 2017 without leaving any setbacks while constructing the building by blocking the common way of passage linking to the municipal road and to declare the same as illegal, arbitrary, unjust, discriminatory, violative of Articles 14, 19 and 350 of Constitution of India and consequently direct the 3rd respondent to act upon my representation dated 18-01- 2025 as per procedure. lA 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 to direct the respondents 3rd respondent on my representation dated 18.01.2025 despite receiving the same with regard to the construction of the house in Sy.No. 259 in violation to the principles laid down in Andhra Pradesh Municipal Corporation Act, 1995 and Andhra Pradesh Building Rules, 2017 without leaving any setbacks, pending disposal of main writ petition in the interest of justice. Counsel for the Petitioners; SMT KOPPARTHI SUMATHI Counsel for the Respondent Nos. 1&2: GP MUNCIPAL ADMN AND URBAN DEV Counsel for the Respondent No.3: SRI A S C BOSE SC FOR MUNICIPAL CORPORATION Counsel for the Respondent No.4: GP FOR REVENUE Counsel for the Respondent No.5: GP FOR HOME The Court made the following order: 1 APHC010056032025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3333] THURSDAY, THE TWENTIETH DAY OF FEBRUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE V.SUJATHA WRIT PETITION NO: 3157/2025 Between: ...PETITIONER(S) Bapatia Sridevi and another AND ...RESPONDENT(S) The State of Andhra Pradesh and others Counsel for the Petitioner(S): 1.KOPPARTHI SUMATHI Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1.GP FOR HOME 2.GP FOR REVENUE 3.GP MUNCIPAL ADMN AND URBAN DEV AP The Court made the following: 2 ORDER: This writ petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking the following relief:- “....to issue a writ, order or direction more particuiariy one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus deciaring the inaction of the respondents, especially respondent No.3 on the petitioners’ representation dated 18.01.2025 despite receiving the same with regard to the construction of the house in Sy.No.259 in violation to the principles laid down in Andhra Pradesh Municipal Corporation Act, 1995 and Andhra Pradesh Building Rules, 2017 without leaving any setbacks while constructing the building by blocking the common way of passage linking to the municipal road and to declare the same as illegal, arbitrary, unjust, discriminatory, violative of Articles 14, 19 and 350 of Constitution of India and consequently direct the 3"^ respondent to act upon the representation dated 18.01.2025 as per procedure ....” 2. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners, learned Government Pleader for Municipal Administration and Urban Development for respondents No.1 and 2, Mr.A.S.C.Bose, learned Standing Counsel for respondent No.3, learned Government Pleader for Revenue for respondent No.4 and learned Government Pleader for Home for respondent No.5. Today, when the matter came up for hearing, learned Standing 3. / Counsel for respondent No.3/Commissioner, Ongole Municipal ] Corporation, Ongole has furnished a copy of instructions, wherein it is stated that after receiving the said representation dated 18.01.2025 from the petitioners, the respondent authorities have inspected the site and enquired the matter with the petitioners. It is further stated that, with regard to the access road, it is a joint passage, which in fe^is the disputed and the unofficial respondents herein. As supposed to approach the competent Civil Court However, the passage between the petitioners such, the petitioners are to claim respondent authorities representation submitted by the petitioner on 18.01.2025. their easement rights on the said passage, have stated that they have not passed any orders on the admitted fact that so far no orders have been passed on the representation made by the petitioners on 18.01.2025. instead of keeping the writ petition pending, this However, it is an 4. In view of the same Court feels it appropriate to dispose of the Writ Petition by directing authorities to consider the representation made by the petitioners 5. respondent dated 18.01.2025 and pass appropriate orders, in accordance with law, within a period of two (02) weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. With the above direction, the Writ Petition is disposed of. There shall be 6. no order as to costs. sequel, miscellaneous applications pending, if any, shall also As a Sd/- M SRlNiVAS j assistant registrar j stand closed. //TRUE COPY// SECTION OFFICER To, Principal Secretary, MA and UD Department, State of Andhra 1. The Pradesh, Secretariat, Velagapudi, Amaravathi,Guntur Dist 2. The Commissioner and Director of Municipal Administration, Prime Hill Crest, 4th Floor, Vaddeswaram, Guntur District. 3. The Commissioner, Ongole Municipal Corporation, Governor Road, Jakrama Nagar, Ongole. Prakasam District. '4. The Tahsildar, Ongole, Prakasam District. 5. The Station House Officer, Gopal Nagar, Ongole, Prakasam district. 6. One CC to Sri. Kopparthi Sumathi Advocate [OPUC] 7. One CC to Sri. A S C Bose SC for Municipal Corporation [OPUC] 8. Two CCs to GP for Municipal Admin And Urban Dev, High Court Of Andhra Pradesh. [OUT] 9. Two CCs to GP for Home, High Court Of Andhra Pradesh. [OUT] Two CCs to GP for Revenue, High Court Of Andhra Pradesh. 10. [OUT] Three CD Copies 11. GSC HIGH COURT DATED:20/02/2025 ORDER WP.No.3157 of 2025 DISPOSING OF THE WP WITHOUT COSTS