1 APHC010065892025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [0] FRIDAY ,THE SEVENTH DAY OF FEBRUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT WRIT PETITION NO: 3450/2025 Between: Kalidindi Sunil Pavan and Others ...PETITIONER(S) AND State Of Andhra Pradesh and Others ...RESPONDENT(S) Counsel for the Petitioner(S): 1. G SUDHEER KUMAR Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. GP FOR MUNCIPAL ADMN URBAN DEV The Court made the following: 2 ORDER: This Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking the following relief: “....may be pleased to issue a writ of Mandamus or any other appropriate writ order or direction declaring the action of the Respondent No.2 in marking the petitioners house properties to an extent of 446.2 Square Yards and 225.09 Square Yards situated at Door No.24-14-12, 12/a and 24-14-96 respectively in Survey No.439/16 in Revenue Ward No.1 at Srirama Puram and Bhimavarm Municipality without any notice or calling for explanation and without granting any opportunity to petitioners and without issuing any proceedings under Andhra Pradesh Municipalities Act 1965 as illegal arbitrary and violative of Art 14, 19 and 300A of the Constitution of India and consequently direct the respondents not to demolish any portion of petitioners house property without following due process of law and pass …...” 02 Heard Sri G.Sudheer Kumar, learned counsel for the petitioners and learned Assistant Government Pleader for Municipal Administration and Urban Development. 3. The case of the petitioners is that, they are the absolute owners and possessors of house bearing Door Nos.24-14-12 & 12/a with an extent of 446.2 Square yards in Sy.No.439/16 situated at Revenue Ward No.01, Bheemavaram Village, Bheemavaram Municipal area and the respondent No.2, without issuing any prior notice to the petitioners, gave marking on their houses for extension of an existing road by 10 feet in width. As such, the petitioners pray to protect the interest. 04. When the matter is taken up for hearing, the learned Standing Counsel on oral instructions submits that as the markings were given for the purpose of 3 drainage, if any action is intended to take the Municipality, they will follow the procedure as contemplated under the law. 05. Perused the material available on record. 06. Taking into consideration the submissions of both the learned counsel, instead of keeping the writ petition, this Court feels it appropriate to dispose of the writ petition at the admission stage, by directing the respondent authorities not to interfere with the petitioners’ house properties to an extent of 446.2 Square Yards and 225.09 Square Yards situated at Door No.24-14-12, 12/a and 24-14-96 respectively in Survey No.439/16 in Revenue Ward No.1 at Srirama Puram and Bhimavarm Municipality, without following due process of law. 7. Accordingly, the Writ Petition is disposed of. No costs. Miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, in this Writ Petition shall stand closed. Miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shall stand closed. __________________ JUSTICE V.SUJATHA Date: 07.02.2025 KKV Note: The learned Standing Counsel is directed to intimate the order to the concerned Municipal Corporation. 4 5 44 THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE V.SUJATHA WRIT PETITION NO: 3450/2025 Dated 07.02.2025 KKV