IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH :: AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) WEDNESDAY, THE NINETEENTH DAY OF FEBRUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE V.SUJATHA WRIT PETITION NO: 4572 OF 2025 Between: Shaik Afroz Hussain, S/o. Shaik Jaffar Hussain Aged about 33 years, Occ: Businesss, R/o. 50/268-2-3, Ravindra Nagar, Kadapa, YSR District. ...Petitioner AND 1. The State of Andhra Pradesh, rep., by its Principal Secretary, Municipal Administration Department Secretariat Buildings, Velagapudi, Amaravati, Guntur District. The District Collector, Kadapa, YSR District. The Kadapa Municipal Corporation, Kadapa, YSR District rep., by its Commissioner. The Tahsildar, Kadapa Mandal, Kadapa, YSR District. The Mandal Land Surveyor, Kadapa Urban, Kadapa, YSR District 2. 3. 4. 5. ...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 an appropriate order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the Notice in Roc.No.01/1013003/20 25, dated 18.02.2025 issued by the respondent % No.3 directing the petitioner to remove the alleged unauthorized construction of compound wall as if the same is obstructing the non existing 40 feet Master Plan road within 24 hours from the date of of the notice, failing which the further steps will be taken to said unauthorized structures without any further notice as arbitrary, illegal, contrary to the provisions of the Andhra Pradesh Municipal Corporation Act, 1955 and also well- established legal principles violative of the fundamental and Constitutional rights guaranteed under Articles 14,19 and 21 of the Constitution of India and set aside the same. receipt remove the apart from being to him consequently 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 pleased to grant stay of all further proceedings inpursuance of the Notice in Roc.No.01/1013003/2025, dated 18.02.2025 issued by the No.3, without adhering to due process of law, pending disposal of the above Writ Petition. respondent Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI. V R REDDY KOWURI Counsel for the Respondent No.1: GP MUNCIPAL ADMN AND URBAN DEV Counsel for the Respondent Nos. 2,4 and 5: GP FOR REVENUE Counsel for the Respondent No. 3: SRI P VENGAL REDDY SC MAUD FOR The Court made the following order: . a APHC010088792025 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: 4572/2025 Between: ...PETITIONER Shaik Afroz Hussain AND ...RESPONDENT(S) The State Of Andhra Pradesh and Others Counsel for the Petitioner: 1.VR REDDY KOVVURI Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1.GP FOR REVENUE 2.GP MUNCIPAL ADMN AND URBAN DEV AP The Court made the following: ^1^ ORDER:- This Writ Petition is filed by the petitioner, under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking Mandamus, for the following relief: “...to issue an appropriate order or direction more particuiariyone in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the Notice in Roc.No.01/1013003/2025, dated 18.02.2025 issued by the respondent No. 3 directing the petitioner to remove the alleged unauthorized construction of compound wall as if the same is obstructing the non-existing 40 feet Master Plan road within 24 hours from the date of receipt of the notice, failing which the further steps will be taken to remove the said unauthorized structures without any further notice as arbitrary, illegal, contrary to the provisions of the Andhra Pradesh Municipal Corporation Act, 1955 and also well-established legal principles, apart from being violative of the fundamental and Constitutional rights guaranteed to him under Articles 14, 19 and 21 of the Constitution of India and consequently set aside the same...” 2. Heard Sri V.R.Reddy Kovvuri, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri P.Vengal Reddy, learned Standing Counsel for Municipal Corporation. Today when the matter came up for hearing, learned Standing Counsel for Municipal Corporation, has furnished a copy of written instructions of respondent No.3, wherein it is stated that in pursuance of the orders passed 3. by this Court in W.P.No.1610 of 2025, dated 27.01.2025, the respondent office has only issued the impugned notice. It is further stated that the petitioner has illegally constructed unauthorized compound wall on the 40 feet wide master plan road, constituting a clear encroachment on public property. It is further stated that the respondent have issued^the impugned notice 'V; a following due process of law, directing the petitioner to remove the unauthorized construction of the compound wall. On a perusal of the impugned notice, it can be seen that though it is 4. called as a notice, admittedly it is a direction, directing the petitioner to remove the unauthorized constructions made by him within 24 hours from the date of receipt of the notice. If at all it is the case of the respondentsthat the petitioner has illegally made certain constructions, it is for the respondents to issue a show cause notice calling for an explanation, if any, from the petitioner but straight away cannot pass an order directing the petitioner to remove the said constructions within 24 hours, even without conducting any enquiry on the aspect whether the petitioner has admittedly made the illegal constructionsor not. In view of the same, instead of keeping the writ petition pending, this 5. Court feels it appropriate to dispose of the writ petition by directing the petitioner to submit an explanation to the said notice dated 18.02.2025 by treating it as a show cause notice, within a period of two (02) weeks from the date of receipt of copy of this order and thereafter the respondents shall conduct an enquiry by issuing notice to the petitioner and then proceed in accordance with law. Till such time, the respondents are directed not to interfere with the petitioner’s schedule property. With the above directions, the Writ Petition is disposed of. No order as 6. to costs. Consequently miscellaneous applications pending, if any, in the Writ Petition, shall also stand closed. Sd/- M SRINIVAS ASSISTANT REGISTRAR //TRUE COPY// SECTION OFFICER To, 1 The Principal Secretary, Municipal Administration Department Secretariat Buildings, State of Andhra Pradesh, Velagapudi, Amaravati, Guntur District. 2. The District Collector, Kadapa, YSR District. 3. The Commissioner, Kadapa Municipal Corporation, Kadapa, YSR District. 4. The Tahsildar, Kadapa Mandal, Kadapa, YSR District. 5. The Mandal Land Surveyor, Kadapa Urban, Kadapa, YSR District 6. One CC to Sri. V R Reddy Kovvuri Advocate [OPUC] 7. One CC to Sri. P Vengal Reddy SC for MAUD [OPUC] 8. Two CCs to GP for Municipal Admin and Urban Dev, High Court Of Andhra Pradesh. [OUT] 9. Two CCs to GP for Revenue, High Court Of Andhra Pradesh. [OUT] Three CD Copies 10. GSC ¥ HIGH COURT DATED:19/02/2025 ORDER WP.No.4572 of 2025 0 7 MAR 2125 | ‘K ^ Current Section XT DISPOSING OF THE WP WITHOUT COSTS