APHC010067332025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH (Special Original Jurisdiction) TUESDAY ,THE ELEVENTH DAY OF FEBRUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE V.SUJATHA WRIT PETITION NO: 3542/2025 Between: Devi Reddy Aditya Youth Organisation, The State Of Andhra Pradesh and Others Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. POLANKI ANAND SURYA Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. GP MUNCIPAL ADMN AND URBAN DEV AP The Court made the following: 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) TUESDAY ,THE ELEVENTH DAY OF FEBRUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE V.SUJATHA WRIT PETITION NO: 3542/2025 Devi Reddy Aditya Youth Organisation, ...PETITIONER AND The State Of Andhra Pradesh and Others ...RESPONDENT(S) Counsel for the Petitioner: POLANKI ANAND SURYA Counsel for the Respondent(S): GP MUNCIPAL ADMN AND URBAN DEV AP made the following: IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH [3333] ...PETITIONER ...RESPONDENT(S) 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 or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the Respondents Nos.2 to 4 more particularly Respondent No.2 in issuing the Impugned Proceedings-cum-order vide Roc.No.228/1516/Gl dated 07.02.2025 for eviction of the petitioner from the water plant situated at D.NO.3/1184 Cooperative Colony Police Line Elementary School Khaddeela Badi Kadapa YSR Kadapa District without issuing any show cause notice and without giving any opportunity of personal hearing as arbitrary illegal contrary to the well established legal principles apart from being violative of Natural Justice fundamental and constitutional rights guaranteed us under article 14 19 21 and 300A of the Constitution of India and consequently to suspend the Impugned Proceedings-cum-order vide Roc No 228/1516/Gl dated 07 02 2025 issued by the 2nd respondent pending disposal of the Writ petition before this Honble court and pass of…...” 2. The case of the petitioner is that the petitioner organization was formed in the name and style of “Devi Reddy Aditya Youth Organization” and registered under Section 39 Societies Registration Act, 2001 vide Society Registration No.45/2019, dated 22.02.2019 in order to do social service to the poor people. The petitioner organization made a representation to the 2nd respondent-Municipal Commissioner intended to setup a water plan in 23rd Division at low cost. The 2nd respondent forwarded the said representation to the Standing Committee vide Roc.No.118/G1/2019 and on 18.03.2019, the 3 Standing Committee accepted the said representation vide resolution No.484. Consequently, upon which the petitioner organization was allotted a site at Door No.3/1184, Cooperative Colony, Police Line, Elemntary School (Khaddeela Badi), Kadapa, YSR Kadapa District for setting up the water plant. Accordingly, the organization set up a water plant in the name and style of YSR Water Foundation in the allotted portion and are supplying nearly 32,000 liters of purified water to the people residing in 23rd and 24th division for Rs.5 per liters tin and the collected amount is being used only to maintain the water plant not for any profit till 28.05.2024. The organization supplied water without any interruption. While the matter being so, on 28.05.2024 and also on 17.06.2024, the 3rd respondent visited the water plant and directed the petitioner organization to vacate the premises immediately and threatened them that they will seize the said place, in the event if the petitioner does not vacate the premises. On producing the result ion powers by the Standing Committee the 3rd respondent staff left the place threatening them with dire consequences. Aggrieved by the said illegal action of the respondents, the present writ petition is filed. 3 Heard Sri Polanki Anand Surya, learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Government Pleader for Municipal Administration and Urban Development and Sri A.S.C.Bose, learned Standing Counsel for respondent Nos.2 to 4. 4 04. Today, when the matter came up for hearing, the learned Standing Counsel appearing on behalf of the 2nd respondent furnished the copy of the instructions, wherein it is stated that it is come to then otice of the 2nd respondent that the water plant installed by the petitioner organization is causing disturbances to the school atmosphere and creating inconvenience for the school children. The instructions further shows that the water plant should have been constructed in the open space within the school premises as per the estimates approved by the Municipal Corporation but contrary to the same the petitioner organization by occupying the school room belonging to the school running the commercial water plant which is clear violation of terms and conditions. Consequently the 2nd respondent issued notice to the petitioner dated 02.01.2025 and 10.01.2025 directing the petitioner organization to vacate the school premises but despite receiving notices the petitioner neither responded nor vacated the premises. The instructions further shows that the 2nd respondent followed the due process of law by issuing proceedings vide Roc.No.228/1516/01, dated 07.02.2025. But as the petitioner organization did not vacate the premises, the 2nd respondent- Municipal Corporation seized the water plant by duly following the procedure by way of panchanamma. The petitioner organization was granted Rs.3,00,000/- through APMDC. If any additional amount was spent on the 5 water plant machinery, this Corporation will return the machinery to the petitioner. 05. Perused the material available on record. 06. On a perusal of the record, it shows that the only grievance of the 2nd respondent authority is that in view of the construction of water plant in the school premises it is causing disturbances to the school atmosphere and creating nuisance and inconvenience to the school going children. Infact the said water plant should have been constructed in the open space within the school premises with a shed as per the estimates approved by the Engineers. It the contention of the respondent authorities that the petitioner by occupying the class room in the school is running commercial water plant which is clear violation of terms and conditions. The learned counsel for the petitioner drawn the attention of this Court to the No Objection Certificate given by the Head Teacher, Municipal Corporation Primary School, (Khaddeela Badi), Kadapa, YSR Kadapa District, wherein it is stated that there are thirteen children in their school and one classroom is enough for them and they expressed their no objection to establish YSR Water Foundation as it is already approved in the Municipal Standing Committee’s resolution. 07. Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case and in view of the fact that the water plant is seized by the respondent authorities, without 6 going into the merits of the case, this Court feels it appropriate to direct the respondent authorities to hand over the water plant machinery seized by them to the petitioner in accordance with law. Accordingly, this writ petition is disposed of, giving liberty to the petitioner to make a representation to the 2nd respondent-Municipal Corporation seeking to handover the water plant machinery and on such representation being made the 2nd respondent shall consider the same and handover the water plant machinery seized by them in accordance with law. There shall be no order as to costs. Miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, in this Writ Petition shall stand closed. __________________ JUSTICE V.SUJATHA Date: 11.02.2025 KKV 7 161 THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE V.SUJATHA WRIT PETITION NO: 3452/2025 Dated 11.02.2025 KKV