APHC010071512025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3333] WEDNESDAY, THE NINETEENTH DAY OF FEBRUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SMT. JUSTICE V. SUJATHA WRIT PETITION No.3820 of 2025 Between: The Chittoor Bus-Stand Shop-keepers Association and another ...PETITIONER(S) AND The State of Andhra Pradesh and others ...RESPONDENT(S) Counsel for the Petitioner(S): 1. A. SYAM SUNDAR REDDY Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. GP FOR MUNCIPAL ADMN.& URBAN DEV 2. GP FOR REVENUE 3. P. VENGAL REDDY, STANDING COUNSEL The Court made the following: 2 VS,J W.P.No3820 of 2025 ORDER : This Writ Petition, under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, is filed seeking the following relief: “..to issue a Writ, Order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus a) declaring the action of the 3rd Respondent in erecting the iron sheet fencing around the Bus Stand, situated in an extent of Ac.1-68 cents containing absolute property of the Petitioner’s Association for an extent of Ac. 0-18 cents, situated in Survey No.479/6 & 479/7 of Chittoor town, Chittoor District preventing the transport operations by RTC and entry of the travelers, buses and thereby depriving our petty businesses in the absolute property of Petitioner’s Association for an extent of Ac. 0-18 cents, their livelihood, is illegal, arbitrary, unjust, violation of the fundamental rights guaranteed under Article 14, 21, contrary to the G.O.Rt.No.1332 dt. 31-08-1996, order in W.P.No.15398/2003 dt. 29-07-2003 and consequently direct the 3rd Respondent to remove the iron sheet fencing around the Bus Stand, situated in an extent of Ac.1-68 cents containing absolute property of the Petitioner’s Association for an extent of Ac. 0-18 cents, situated in Survey No.479/6 and 479/7 of Chittoor town, Chittoor District in obedience with G.O.Rt.No.1332 dt. 31-08-1996 Revenue (ASN. IV) Department and order of the erstwhile this Hon’ble Court in W.P.No.15398/2003 dt. 29-07-2003 and allow the petitioners to carry on petty businesses b) declaring the action of the 3rd Respondent in attempting to dispossess the Petitioners from their absolute property for an extent of Ac. 0-18 cents situated in Survey No.479/6 and 479/7 of Chittoor town, Chittoor District, alienated to them by the State of Andhra Pradesh under G.O.Rt.No.1332 dt. 31-08-1996 Revenue (ASN.IV) Department is illegal, arbitrary, without having any manner of right, title, interest, violation of the fundamental rights guaranteed under Article 14, 21 and consequently direct the 3rd Respondent not to interfere with the Petitioners’ peaceful possession and enjoyment of their absolute property for an extent of Ac.0-18 cents, situated in Survey No.479/6 & 479/7 of Chittoor town, Chittoor District.” 2. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners, learned Government Pleader for Municipal Administration & Urban Development representing respondent No.1, learned Government Pleader for Revenue representing respondent No.2 and learned Standing Counsel for respondent No.3. 3 VS,J W.P.No3820 of 2025 3. The case of the petitioners, in brief, is as follows: (i) Initially, in the year 1956, the Government set up a small bus stand in the Government land situated in Sy.Nos.479/6 & 479/7 of Chittoor Revenue Village. In the same year, the erstwhile members of the 1st petitioner-Association raised thatched huts in the premises around the bus stand and since then, they have been carrying on their petty businesses in the said premises. Subsequently, the Government, vide G.O.Ms.No.338 Revenue (Q) Department dated 30.03.1977, alienated Ac.1.68 cents of Government land in Sy.Nos.479/6 and 479/7 of Chittoor Town to the 3rd respondent- Corporation, for the use of bus stand and providing amenities to the travelling public. (ii) The Government has also alienated Ac.0.18 cents in Sy.Nos.479/6 & 479/7 in favour of the 1st petitioner-Association at a market value of Rs.1,050/- per square yard, vide G.O.Ms.No.554 dated 14.06.1990, and though initially the 1st petitioner-Association was aggrieved by the market value fixed, ultimately, it has agreed to pay the same in lump-sum and in pursuance of the permission granted by the Government vide G.O.Rt.No.1332 dated 31.08.1996, the 1st petitioner-Association has paid the entire amount in lump-sum. Thereafter, the 1st petitioner-Association has divided the alienated land of Ac.0.18 cents into 55 stalls, in an extent of 10 feet x 20 feet each, and allotted them to its members, who continued to carry on their petty businesses therein. (iii) It is further stated that in the year 1983, when the 3rd respondent insisted the members of the 1st petitioner-Association to pay rent for the shops, they filed O.S.No.977 of 1983 on the file of the I Additional District Munsif, Chittoor, seeking a declaration that the 3rd 4 VS,J W.P.No3820 of 2025 respondent is not entitled to collect rent from them. After full-fledged trial, the said suit was decreed, vide judgment and decree dated 29.07.1993, however, granting liberty to the 3rd respondent to file a separate suit for declaration of title in respect of the land in Sy.Nos.479/6 and 479/7. However, the 3rd respondent has neither preferred an appeal against the said judgment and decree nor filed a separate suit, as such, the decree and Judgment dated 29.07.1993 in O.S.No.977 of 1983 has attained finality. (iv) It is further stated that in the year 2003, there was an attempt by the 3rd respondent to shift the bus stand to Kattamanchi Tank near Puttur Road. Challenging the said action, the 1st petitioner- Association filed a writ petition - W.P.No.15398 of 2003, which was disposed of by this Court on 29.07.2003, with a direction to the 3rd respondent to provide a bus stop at the old municipal bus stand. However, the bus stand is still operating at the existing location. (v) While that being so, on 29.01.2025, the 3rd respondent, having colluded with some private persons and with a view to allocate the subject premises to them, has erected an iron sheet fencing around the bus stand in Sy.Nos.479/6 & 479/7, including the property of Ac.0.18 cents alienated to the 1st petitioner-Association, thereby closing the entrance to the bus stand and affecting the businesses of the members of the 1st petitioner-Association, besides causing traffic congestion. (vi) Aggrieved thereby, the 1st petitioner-Association submitted a representation to the 2nd respondent-District Collector, on 03.02.2025, requesting to take necessary action, but the same has not been acted upon. On the other hand, the 3rd respondent has issued a notice to the members of the 1st petitioner-Association on 04.02.2025 calling upon them to submit documents in proof of their 5 VS,J W.P.No3820 of 2025 right and title over the subject premises, for which the 1st petitioner- Association has submitted a reply on 10.02.2025. However, the 3rd respondent has not removed the fencing, which is causing hindrance to the petty businesses of the 1st petitioner-Association. Hence, the petitioners filed the present writ petition. 4. Today, when the matter came up for admission, learned Standing Counsel representing the 3rd respondent has furnished a copy of written instructions received from the Commissioner of the 3rd respondent, wherein it is stated that, in order to address the traffic issues and to protect the public property, the 3rd respondent, in the larger interest of public welfare and urban planning, installed an iron sheet fencing along the eastern and southern boundaries of the bus stand, ensuring that the shops located on the northern and western sides remain undisturbed. It is further stated that the fencing ensures proper regulation of traffic adjacent to the property, preventing traffic congestion and potential accidents. It is further stated that the petty business activities of the 1st petitioner-Association remain undisturbed, as the fenced area does not encroach upon any authorized commercial establishments and the fencing merely prevents unauthorized occupation of public land. 5. From the above instructions, it is clear that the 3rd respondent erected the iron sheet fencing along the eastern and southern boundaries of the bus stand, to address traffic issues, reduce the risk of potential accidents and also to prevent unauthorized occupation of public land. The instructions would also indicate that the shops located on the northern and western sides remain undisturbed and that the petty business activities of the 1st petitioner-Association remain unaffected by the fencing. 6 VS,J W.P.No3820 of 2025 6. In view of the same, this Court deems it appropriate to dispose of this writ petition at the admission stage, by directing the respondents not to interfere with the possession of the 1st petitioner- Association over the property admeasuring Ac.0.18 cents in Sy.Nos.479/6 and 479/7 of Chittoor Town, which is stated to have been alienated in its favour, without following due process of law. 7. With the above direction, the writ petition is disposed of. No order as to costs. Interlocutory Applications, if any, pending in this writ petition shall stand closed. ___________________ JUSTICE V. SUJATHA Date: 19.02.2025 IBL 7 VS,J W.P.No3820 of 2025 THE HONOURABLE SMT. JUSTICE V. SUJATHA WRIT PETITION No. 3820 of 2025 Dt: 19.02.2025 IBL