IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH :: AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) FRIDAY, THE FOURTEENTH DAY OF FEBRUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE V.SUJATHA WRIT PETITION NO: 3638 OF 2025 Between: Davuluri Srinivasa Rao, S/o Venkata Kanakaiah, aged about 49 years R/o 5-67-65/4A, 5/19 Brodipet, Guntur - 522002. ...PETITIONER AND 1. The State of Andhra Pradesh, Represented by its Principal Secretary, Municipal Administration Department and Urban Development Department, Secretariat Buildings, Velagapudi, Amaravathi, Guntur District. 2. The Guntur Municipal Corporation, Rep. By its Commissioner, Guntur Municipal Corporation Office, 0pp. Gandhi Park, Lalapet, Guntur. ...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 of the 2"'^ respondent in interfering with the possession of the petitioner over her property i.e., 19 sq. yards of land along with a RCC shop No.3 (GF-3), Door No.5-55-80, Rohini Arcade Apartment, 4/19 Brodipet, Guntur City and initiating steps to demolish the said property of the petitioner without following the due process of law as illegal, arbitrary, unconstitutional and consequently direct the Respondent No.2 and its staff not to interfere with the possession and ownership of Petitioner over her property 19 sq. yards of land along with a RCC shop No.3 (GF-3), Door No.5-55-80, Rohini Arcade Apartment, 4/19 Brodipet, Guntur City wfthout following the due process of law. i.e. 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 respondent and its staff not to interfere with nd pleased to direct the 2 possession enjoyment of petitioner over his property i.e., 19 sq. yards of land along with a RCC shop No.3 (GF-3), Door No.5-55-80, Rohini Arcade Apartment, 4/19 Brodipet, Guntur City in any manner including trespass, dispossession, demolition or blocking the ingress/ egress from shop, or canvassing to stop the customers. Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI SASANKA BHUVANAGIRI Counsel for the Respondent No.1: GP FOR MUNICIPAL ADMN & URBAN DEVELOPMENT Counsel for the Respondent No.2: SRI A.S.C.BOSE, SC FOR MUNC & MUNC CORPORATION The Court made the following: ORDER 1 APHC010064222025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3333] FRIDAY, THE FOURTEENTH DAY OF FEBRUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE V.SUJATHA WRIT PETITION NO: 3638/2025 Between; ...PETITIONER Davuluri Srinivasa Rao AND ...RESPONDENT{S) The State of Andhra Pradesh and another Counsel for the Petitioner; 1 .SASANKA BHUVANAGIRI Counsel for the Respondent(S); 1.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 or order or direction more particulariy one in the nature of WRIT OF MANDAMUS declaring the action of the 2 respondent in interfering with the possession of the petitioner’s property i.e., 19 sq.yards of land along with a RCC shop No.3 (GF-3), Door No. 5-55-80, Rohini Arcade Apartment, 4/19 Brodipet, Guntur City and initiating steps to demolish the said property of the petitioner without following the due process of law as illegal, arbitrary, unconstitutional and consequently direct the Respondent No. 2 and its staff not to interfere with the possession and ownership of Petitioner’s property i.e., 19 sq.yards of land along with a RCC shop No.3 (GF-3), Door No.5-55- 80, Rohini Arcade Apartment, 4/19 Brodipet, Guntur City without following the due process of law ” nd The case of the petitioner is that he is the absolute owner of property i.e., 19 sq.yards of land along with RCC shop No.3 (GF-3), Door No.5-55-80, Rohini Arcade Apartment, 4/19 Brodipet, Guntur City having purchased the vide sale deed dated 16.03.2006. The petitioner has been regularly paying taxes to the 2'"'' respondent Corporation. However, on 22.03.2010, the 2""^ respondent issued a notice to the petitioner under Section 636 of Hyderabad Municipal Corporation Act, 1955, declaring that the petitioner raised unauthorized construction and directed him to remove the same. Challenging the said notice, the petitioner filed W.P^o.13443 of 2010 before 2. same 3 the erstwhile High Court of Andhra Pradesh at Hyderabad, which was disposed of by an order dated 16.06.2010, directing the parties to treat the notice as a show-cause notice under Section 452 of GHMC Act, submit an explanation to the same. In pursuance of the order passed by the Hon’ble Court, the petitioner submitted his reply on 14.07.2011 to the 2"^ respondent, raising objections, but no order was passed by the 2"^ respondent, and the petitioner’s possession remained undisturbed until recently. However, on 30.01.2025, the staff of the 2""^ respondent visited the petitioner’s property and informed the petitioner that the property would be demolished in two weeks, as there was no pending litigation, and a demolition drive was going to be undertaken in the City during the second week of February 2025, and the petitioner’s property is also included in the said list. The petitioner asserts that respondent is not following due process of law, despite the earlier order of the Hon’ble High Court of Andhra Pradesh, and is attempting to demolish the property after almost 14 >2 years of the said order. Challenging the action of the 2^^ respondent, the petitioner has filed this writ petition. nd the 2 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Government 3. Pleader for Municipal Administration and Urban Development for respondent N0.I and Mr.A.S.C.Bose, learned Standing Counsel for respondent No.2. Today, when the matter came up for hearing, learned Standing Counsel for respondent No.2 furnished a copy of instruction of the City Planner, Guntur Municipal Corporation, dated 13.02.2025, wherein it is stated that the petitioner’s shop is located in stilt floor, which is nn^nt for parking purpose. 4. ► ' 4 The shop was neither permitted by the GMC nor regularized. It is further stated that previously, this Court in W.P.Nos. 13448 and 13443 of 2010 passed orders on 16.06.2010, observing that the impugned notice dated 22.03.2010 shall be treated as a show-cause notice under Section 452 of HMC Act, and directed the petitioners therein to submit their explanation/objections, if any, within four weeks from 16.06.2010, and that nd such objections, if filed, shall be considered by the 2 respondent Corporation, and orders be passed in accordance with law. It is further submitted that the GMC will issue notice for the unauthorized shops constructed in parking floor and will follow procedure in accordance with law. 5. In view of the above facts and circumstances, it can be understood that though the petitioner has submitted an explanation dated 14.07.2011 to the provisional notice dated 22.03.2010 in pursuance of the orders passed by this Court, on 16.06.2010. But, no orders have been passed on the said explanation, however, after a lapse of almost 14 years now, the staff of the 2 nd respondent visited the petitioner’s property and threatened them that the petitioner’s schedule property shall be demolished as a part of demolition drive undertaken in the city during the 2^^^ week of February, 2025. However, it can also be seen that the 2^"^ respondent, in the above instructions has admitted that the respondents will issue a notice if they intend 6. to demolish the unauthorized shops constructed by the petitioner in the parking floor and will proceed further by duly following the due process contemplatedunder law. 5 In view of the same, the Writ Petition is disposed of, by directing the respondents not to interfere with the petitioner’s possession over the subject matter property i.e., 19 sq.yards of land along with RCC shop No.3 (GF-3), Door No.5-55-80, Rohini Arcade Apartment, 4/19 Brodipet, Guntur City, 7. without following due process of law. No costs. Miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, in this Writ Petition shall stand closed. Sd/- N. NAGAMMA ASSISTANT REGI^RAR //TRUE COPY// SECTION OFFICER To, The Principal Secretary, Municipal Administration & Urban Development Department, State of Andhra Pradesh Secretariat Buildings, Velagapudi, Amaravathi, Guntur District. 2. The Commissioner, Guntur Municipal Corporation, Guntur Municipal Corporation Office, 0pp. Gandhi Park, Lalapet. Guntur. 3. One CC to Sri Sasanka Bhuvanagiri, Advocate [OPUC] 4. Two CCs to GP for Municipal Admn & Urban Development, High Court of Andhra Pradesh. [OUT] 5. Three CD Copies. 1. gi HIGH COURT DATED:14/02/2025 ORDER WP.No.3638 of 2025 2 7 M7.R 20n 11 SCa , Current Section DISPOSING OF THE WRIT PETITION WITHOUT COSTS