+ ++APHC010070312026 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3329] MONDAY,THE TWENTY THIRD DAY OF FEBRUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE VENKATESWARLU NIMMAGADDA WRIT PETITION NO: 4066/2026 Between: 1. MALLA GANA KRISHNA KISHORE KUMAR, S/O APPALANAIDU, R/O DR. NO. 57-1-22, YANAM ROAD, KAKINADA, EAST GODAVARI DISTRICT. ...PETITIONER AND 1. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, ENDOWMENTS DEPARTMENTS, VELAGAPUDI, SECRETARIAT BUILDINGS, AMARAVATI. 522238. 2. THE COMMISSIONER, THE ENDOWMENTS DEPARTMENT, AMARAVATI. 522238. 3. THE DISTRICT ENDOWMENTS OFFICER, KAKINADA DISTRICT, ANDHRA PRADESH. 533001. 4. THE EXECUTIVE AUTHORITY/EXECUTIVE OFFICER, SRI BALA TRIPURA SUNDARI SAMETHA SRI SARVESWARA SWMAY TEMPLE, JAGANNADHAPURAM KAKINADA, KAKINADA DISTRICT. 533001. 5. THE KAKINADA MUNICIPAL CORPORATION, REP. BY ITS COMMISSIONER, KAKINADA, EAST GODAVARI DISTRICT. 533001. 6. THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, MZ-1, ENDOWMENTS DEPARTMENT, KAKINADA. 533001 2 ...RESPONDENT(S): 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 topleased to issue a Writ of Mandamus or any other appropriate Writ, direction, order or orders declaring the action of the Respondents in not taking any action with respect to the illegal construction of commercial shops within the premises (southern side) of Sri Bala Tripura Sundari Sametha Sri Sarveswara Swmay Temple as the same is being done without obtaining any requisite permissions/authorizations from the concerned and also being contrary to the approved scope of work as elucidated in Notification R.C.No.P/COE/268/2024-64 dated 22.02.2024 (including specification report) and by not considering the representation of the Petitioner dated 02.02.2026 for being illegal, arbitrary, contrary to the cardinal principles of Constitution and consequently, direct the Respondents to halt the unauthorized construction activities in the premises of Sri Bala Tripura Sundari Sametha Sri Sarveswara Swmay Temple contrary to the approved scope of work as elucidated in Notification R.C.No.P/COE/268/2024-64 dated 22.02.2024 (including specification report), restore the demolished compound wall and to consider representation of the Petitioner dated 02.02.2026 and pass IA NO: 1 OF 2026 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 may be pleased to direct the Respondents to forthwith stop all further construction activities regarding proposed commercial shops being constructed in the Southern side of Sri Bala Tripura Sundari Sametha Sri Sarveswara Swmay Temple and pass Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. SINGAMSETTY V.M. SANKAR Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. KAPPERA KOTESWARA RAO SC for Endowments,AP Region. 2. GP FOR ENDOWMENTS The Court made the following: 3 THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE VENKATESWARLU NIMMAGADDA WRIT PETITION NO: 4066/2026 ORDER: This writ petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of the India seeking the following reliefs:- “to issue a writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the Respondents in not taking any action with respect to the illegal construction of commercial shops within the premises (southern side) of Sri Bala Tripura Sundari Sametha Sri Sarveswara Swmay Temple as the same is being done without obtaining any requisite permissions/authorizations from the concerned and also being contrary to the approved scope of work as elucidated in Notification R.C.No.P/COE/268/2024-64 dated 22.02.2024 (including specification report) and by not considering the representation of the Petitioner dated 02.02.2026 for being illegal, arbitrary, contrary to the cardinal principles of Constitution and consequently, direct the Respondents to halt the unauthorized construction activities in the premises of Sri Bala Tripura Sundari Sametha Sri Sarveswara Swmay Temple contrary to the approved scope of work as elucidated in Notification R.C.No.P/COE/268/2024-64 dated 22.02.2024 (including specification report), restore the demolished compound wall and to consider representation of the Petitioner dated 02.02.2026 and pass such other order.” 2. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned Government Pleader and learned Standing Counsel for the respondents. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that respondent No.2 authority granted permission for reconstruction and development of temple on 22.02.2024. Pursuant to the said permission, respondent No.4 completed the reconstruction and 4 development of the subject temple. After completion of the said reconstruction, the temple authorities are proposing to make construction of shopping complex to get some income to the temple without there being any permission and plans as required under the provisions of the Andhra Pradesh Municipal Corporations Act, 1994 (herein after referred as ‘Act, 1994’). While so, the petitioner submitted a representation dated 02.02.2026 to respondent No.4 not to make any construction in the temple premises without there being any valid permission. It seems that the petitioner also submitted several representations under PGRS program and to all the other authorities on 02.02.2026. After considering the representation of the petitioner, respondent No.5/Corporation issued show-cause notice to respondent No.4 on 16.02.2026. He further submits that without valid permission under the provisions of Act, 1994 as well as Andhra Pradesh Metropolitan Region and Urban Development Authorities Act, 2016, such construction cannot be permitted. Even after receipt of show-cause notice dated 16.02.2026, respondent No.4 neither submitted any explanation nor withdrawn the said proposal by way of any express proceedings. Hence, the Writ Petition. 4. On the other hand, learned Standing Counsel furnished written instructions issued by respondent No.4 dated 21.02.2026, wherein, it is stated that there are proposals before the temple authority concerned to make construction of commercial shops on 5 the southern side along the compound wall with estimate cost of Rs.60,00,000/- with the contribution of funds from devotees as well as donors. The said temple is notified under Section 6(c) of the Act and not getting much income to sustain and to perform these activities. Due to the scarcity of funds, the temple authorities made a proposal for construction of shopping complex. It is further stated that the temple administration categorically undertakes that misuse of funds will not be permitted. After due consideration, a decision was taken to proceed with the construction of shops within the premises of the 4th respondent temple. For which, the respondent No.4 will make an application to respondent No.5 for getting approval as required under the Acts as mentioned above. 5. In view of the submissions made by both the learned counsel and on perusal of the material placed on record, this Court is of the considered view the present Writ Petition can be disposed of directing respondent Nos.2 to 4 and 6 herein not to make any construction by way of commercial complex/shopping complex without obtaining prior approval from respondent No.5 as per the provisions of Andhra Pradesh Municipal Corporations Act, 1994 as well as Andhra Pradesh Metropolitan Region and Urban Development Authorities Act, 2016. However, respondent No.5 is at liberty to proceed further in accordance with law. 6 6. With the above directions, the Writ Petition is disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs. As a sequel miscellaneous application, pending, if any, shall also stand closed. ________________________________ VENKATESWARLU NIMMAGADDA, J 23.02.2026 BBSSPP//TTPPSS 7 64 HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE VENKATESWARLU NIMMAGADDA WRIT PETITION NO: 4066/2026 23.02.2026 BBSSPP//TTPPSS