APHC010073332026 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3331] FRIDAY,THE THIRTEENTH DAY OF FEBRUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE SUBBA REDDY SATTI WRIT PETITION NO: 4245/2026 Between: 1. GANJALA SIVAJI, S/O. RAMAKRISHNA, AGED ABOUT 41 YEARS, R/O. 9-14, KRISHNAPURAM, PAMIDIMUKKALA MANDAL, KRISHNA DISTRICT - 521250. ...PETITIONER AND 1. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, THROUGH THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF PANCHAYATI RAJ AND RURAL DEVELOPMENT, SECRETARIAT, VELAGAPUDI, AMARAVATI, GUNTUR DISTRICT-522238. 2. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, KRISHNA DISTRICT, CHILAKALAPUDI MACHILIPATNAM-521002. 3. THE DISTRICT PANCHAYATI OFFICER, KRISHNA DISTRICT, CHILAKALAPUDI, MACHILIPATNAM-521002. 4. MANDAL PARISHAD DEVELOPMENT OFFICER, PAMIDIMUKKALA MANDAL, PAMIDIMUKKALA KRISHNA DISTRICT - 521250. 5. KRISHNAPURAM GRAMA PANCHAYAT, REP. BY ITS PANCHAYAT SECRETARY, KRISHNAPURAM, PAMIDIMUKKALA MANDAL, KRISHNA DISTRICT - 521250. 6. GANJALA VENKAT RAO, S/O. MALLIKARJUN RAO, AGED ABOUT 47 YEARS, R/O. MUSANAYAKUNIPALEM VILLAGE, H/O KRISHNAPURAM, PAMIDIMUKKALA MANDAL, KRISHNA DISTRICT p. 2 - 521250. ...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 to issue an appropriate Writ, Order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of MANDAMUS declaring the inaction of the official Respondents in stopping the unauthorized construction by the above named 6th Respondent by encroaching upon the public road opposite to Ramalayam, H/o.Musanayakunipalem, Krishnapuram Village, Pamidimukkala Mandal, Krishna District on the complaint of the Petitioner and others through PGRS bearing grievance NO.KRI20251229418 dt 29-12-2025 as arbitrary, illegal and violative of provisions of AP.Panchayat Raj Act, 1994 and consequently direct the Respondents particularly 2 to 4 to remove the unauthorized construction on the public road forthwith 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 to direct the official Respondents to stop the unauthorized construction by the above named 6th Respondent by encroaching upon the public road opposite to Ramalayam, H/o.Musanayakunipalem, Krishnapuram Village, Pamidimukkala Mandal, Krishna District, pending disposal of the above writ petition and pass Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. SAI GANGADHAR CHAMARTY Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. GP FOR PANCHAYAT RAJ RURAL DEV 2. GP FOR REVENUE The Court made the following: :: ORDER :: The petitioner filed the above writ petition to declare the inaction of respondents 4 and 5 in preventing the alleged unauthorised construction by p. 3 the 6th respondent, encroaching upon the public road opposite Ramalayam, Krishnapuram Village, Pamidimukkala Mandal, Krishna District, as illegal and arbitrary. 2. Heard Sri Sai Gangadhar Chamarty, learned counsel for petitioner, Ms.Naga Chandrika, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Panchayat Raj and Rural Development appeared for respondents 1 & 3, Sri Sanjeev Rao, learned Assistant Government Pleader appeared for Revenue for respondent No.2 and Sri Chaitanya, learned counsel representing Sri Y.Koteswara Rao, learned Standing Counsel for respondents 4 & 5. Notice in respect of respondent No.6 is dispensed with, since no adverse order is passed affecting the right and interest of respondent No.6. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner is a resident of Musanayakunipalem Village, a hamlet of Krishnapuram Panchayat, Pamidimukkala Mandal, Krishna District. The petitioner gave a complaint dated 29.12.2025 in the PGRS about the constructions undertaken by the 6th respondent by encroaching upon the public road. However, the said complaint was not attended by the 2nd respondent. 4. Today, when the matter is taken up for hearing, Sri Chaitanya, learned counsel appearing on behalf of respondents 4 & 5, furnished the written instructions vide ROC.No.01/2025, dated 12.02.2026, which forms part of the record. A perusal of the instructions would indicate that, in pursuance of the complaint made by the petitioner in PGRS, the authority directed the 6th p. 4 respondent not to construct the compound wall on the road margin and directed to construct the compound wall adjacent to the road. Thereafter, the compound wall was constructed. A survey is being undertaken, which will take four months for completion. Upon completion of the survey, if any encroachments are found, the authorities will take necessary steps in accordance with the law. 5. Given the facts and circumstances of the case, keeping this writ petition pending will not serve any purpose. The Writ Petition is disposed of at the admission stage with the consent of learned counsel on both sides, directing the 5th respondent to initiate necessary action, after completion of the survey, vis-à-vis the encroachments, if any, strictly as per the Rules. There shall be no order as to costs. As a sequel, pending miscellaneous petitions, if any, shall stand closed. ___________________________ JUSTICE SUBBA REDDY SATTI Date: 13.02.2026 KBN p. 5 59 THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE SUBBA REDDY SATTI WRIT PETITION No.4245 OF 2026 Date: 13.02.2026 KBN