APHC010084472025 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.4338 of 2025 Between: M/s VR Yasodhar Projects ...PETITIONER AND The State of Andhra Pradesh and another ...RESPONDENT(S) Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. MALIREDDY GOWTHAM Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1.GP FOR MUNCIPAL ADMN.& URBAN DEV. 2. P. VENGAL REDDY, STANDING COUNSEL The Court made the following: 2 VS,J W.P.No.4338 of 2025 ORDER : This Writ Petition, under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, is filed challenging the Provisional Order Notice bearing No.108/1008/CTR/UC/2024 dated 14.11.2024 and the consequential Confirmation Order bearing No.108/1008/CTR/UC/2024 dated 17.01.2025 issued by the 2nd respondent-Corporation with regard to the construction undertaken by the petitioner at premises bearing D.No.2-976, Puttur Road, K. R. Palli, Chittoor. 2. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned Government Pleader for Municipal Administration & Urban Development representing respondent No.1 and learned Standing Counsel for respondent No.2. 3. The facts of the case are as follows: (i) The petitioner claims to have entered into a registered joint development agreement with one G. Sathyavathi and her family members, vide Document No.2650 of 2023 dated 20.07.2023, for construction of apartments at premises bearing Door No.2-976, Puttur Road, K.R. Palli, Chittoor, and proceeded with construction, after obtaining necessary building permission. Subsequently, the said G. Satyavathi passed away on 18.07.2024. 3 VS,J W.P.No.4338 of 2025 (ii) While things stood thus and at the stage when the structure of the building was nearing completion, the officials of the 2nd respondent visited the subject premises on 16.02.2025 and threatened to pull down the structure. When the petitioner questioned their highhanded action, they informed that a Provisional Order Notice dated 14.11.2024 was issued in the name of G. Sathyavathi and as there was no reply from her, they have passed Confirmation Order dated 17.01.2025 with a direction to bring down the construction into the rule frame, within seven days from the date of receipt of the order. (iii) Questioning such action of the respondents in proceeding against the construction of the petitioner, by merely issuing a notice in the name of a dead person and without putting the petitioner on notice, the present writ petition is filed. 4. Today, when the matter is taken up for admission, Mr. P. Vengal Reddy, learned Standing Counsel for the 2nd respondent, has furnished a copy of the written instructions received from the Commissioner of Chittoor Municipal Corporation, wherein it is stated that during the field verification by the Town Planning staff of the Corporation, major deviations in the construction as compared to the approved plan, were observed. As per the records, the building plan approval was issued in the name of G. Sathyavathi. As such, the Provisional Order Notice dated 14.11.2024 was issued in her name, 4 VS,J W.P.No.4338 of 2025 directing to stop further construction forthwith and to show sufficient cause as to why the deviations should not be removed or pulled down, within seven days from the date of receipt of the notice. As there was no reply to the said Provisional Order Notice, the Confirmation Order dated 17.01.2025, under Sections 452(2) and 461(2) of the A.P.M.C. Act, 1955, read with Sections 86 and 89(3) of the A.P.M.R. & U.D.A. Act, 2016, was issued and served, directing to bring down the construction into the rule frame, within seven days from the date of receipt of the notice. It is further stated that the petitioner has not informed the authorities about the death of the applicant- G. Sathyavathi on 18.07.2024 or about the joint development agreement entered into between them for construction of the building. 5. Upon consideration of the facts and circumstances, it is apparent that by the time the impugned Provisional Order Notice dated 14.11.2024 and the Confirmation Order dated 17.01.2025 were issued, Smt. G. Sathyavathi, the noticee under the said proceedings, was not alive. Thus, both the said proceedings were issued against a dead person and, therefore, they cannot be legally sustained and are liable to be set aside solely on this ground. 6. In view of the same, without going into other merits of the case, the Provisional Order Notice dated 14.11.2024 as well as the Confirmation Order dated 17.01.2025 issued by the 2nd respondent- 5 VS,J W.P.No.4338 of 2025 Corporation are hereby set aside on the sole ground that they were issued against a dead person. However, the petitioner is directed to furnish a copy of the registered joint development agreement entered into between him and late Smt. G. Sathyavathi as well as a copy of the death certificate of Smt. G. Sathyavathi to the 2nd respondent- Corporation within a period of ten days from today. Upon receipt of those documents, the 2nd respondent-Corporation is at liberty to initiate further course of action, as may be necessary, in accordance with law. 7. The writ petition stands allowed to the above extent. 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 6 VS,J W.P.No.4338 of 2025 THE HONOURABLE SMT. JUSTICE V. SUJATHA WRIT PETITION No. 4338 of 2025 Dt: 19.02.2025 IBL