APHC010045682026 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3209] MONDAY,THE SECOND DAY OF FEBRUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE NINALA JAYASURYA WRIT PETITION NO: 2895/2026 Between: 1. YADLAPALLI TRIPURESWARA RAO, S/O. HANUMANTHA RAO, AGED ABOUT 65 YEARS, R/O. D.NO.5-83, MOTHADAKA VILLAGE, TADIKONDA MANDAL, GUNTUR DISTRICT. ...PETITIONER AND 1. THE STATE OF AP, REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY MUNICIPAL ADMINISTRATION DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT BUILDINGS. SECRETARIAT, VELAGAPUDI, GUNTUR DISTRICT, ANDHRA PRADESH 2. ANDHRA PRADESH CAPITTAL REGION DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY, PROJECT OFFICE, RAYAPADU POST, TULLURU MANDAL, AMARAVATHI, REP. BY THE COMMISSIONER. 3. ZONAL JOINT DIRECTOR, ANDHRA PRADESH CAPITTAL REGION DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY, REGIONAL OFFICE, BRADIPET, GUNTUR, GUNTUR DISTRICT. 4. CHINNAM TRIVENI, W/O. ARAVIND, AGED ABOUT 35 YEARS, R/O. 14TH MILE VIA LEMALLE VILLAGE, VINUS PUBLIC SCHOOL, AMARAVATHI MANDAL, PALNADU DISTRICT. ...RESPONDENT(S): NJS,J W.P No.2895 of 2026 2 Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. C SUBODH Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. GP FOR MUNCIPAL ADMN URBAN DEV 2. S PRANATHI NJS,J W.P No.2895 of 2026 3 The Court made the following Order: The present writ petition is filed seeking to declare the action of the respondents in not taking action on the illegal and unauthorized constructions being made by the respondent No.4 in Survey No.158/B of Mothadaka Village, Tadikonda Mandal, Guntur District without obtaining building permission from the respondent No.2 as illegal, arbitrary and violative of provisions of Andhra Pradesh Capital Region Development Authority Act, and for consequential directions. 2. The learned counsel for the petitioner, Mr. C Subodh, made submissions with reference to the averments made in the affidavit filed in support of the writ petition and the material filed along with it, more particularly Ex.P1 dated 07.01.2026. He submits that the CRDA authorities informed the petitioner vide Communication dated 07.01.2026 to the effect that a Provisional Notice with regard to the unauthorized constructions being carried out by the respondent No.4 will be issued but, the respondent authorities have not taken further action in the matter. He submits that taking advantage of the same, the respondent No.4 is continuing the illegal constructions and under the said circumstances, the petitioner is constrained to file the present writ petition. 3. Considered the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioner. However, the same need not be examined in detail in the light of the Confirmation Order dated 30.01.2026 issued by the Town Planning Assistant, a copy of which is placed for perusal of this Court by the learned counsel representing CRDA. 4. As seen from the said Confirmation Order dated 30.01.2026, it is discernible that after issuing the Provisional Order dated 31.12.2025, objections/explanation was submitted by the unofficial respondent No.4 and thereafter, the said Confirmation Order came to be passed. NJS,J W.P No.2895 of 2026 4 5. In the light of the said order and more particularly, as the CRDA authorities have already acted in the matter, the writ petition is closed. No costs. Miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shall stand closed. ___________________________ JUSTICE NINALA JAYASURYA Date:02.02.2026 Ksj